<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_22_1859212</id>
	<title><em>Nexuiz</em> Founder Licenses It For Non-GPL Use</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1269287280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>King InuYasha writes <i> <em>"<a href="http://nexuiz.com/">Nexuiz</a> </em>  founder Lee Vermuelen, along with several other core developers, have <a href="http://alientrap.org/nexuiz/news">licensed the <em>Nexuiz</em> name, Nexuiz.com domain</a>, and DarkPlaces engine to Illfonic in a deal to get <em>Nexuiz</em> on consoles. However, the kink is that the engine has been licensed for non-GPL usage. That is, Illfonic has no intention of contributing their code back to the main GPL <em>Nexuiz</em> project. As a result, <a href="http://www.xonotic.org/2010/03/22/welcome-to-xonotic/"> <em>Nexuiz</em> has been forked into a new project called <em>Xonotic</em></a>. While the main <em>Nexuiz</em> site doesn't mention that Illfonic has no intention of contributing back, <a href="http://www.xonotic.org/faq">the <em>Xonotic</em> project FAQ</a> explains what's going on. Additionally, the <em>Xonotic</em> project states that Illfonic 'may be in violation of the GPL as most contributors to the <em>Nexuiz</em> codebase have not relicensed their work for inclusion in a closed-source project.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>King InuYasha writes " Nexuiz founder Lee Vermuelen , along with several other core developers , have licensed the Nexuiz name , Nexuiz.com domain , and DarkPlaces engine to Illfonic in a deal to get Nexuiz on consoles .
However , the kink is that the engine has been licensed for non-GPL usage .
That is , Illfonic has no intention of contributing their code back to the main GPL Nexuiz project .
As a result , Nexuiz has been forked into a new project called Xonotic .
While the main Nexuiz site does n't mention that Illfonic has no intention of contributing back , the Xonotic project FAQ explains what 's going on .
Additionally , the Xonotic project states that Illfonic 'may be in violation of the GPL as most contributors to the Nexuiz codebase have not relicensed their work for inclusion in a closed-source project .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>King InuYasha writes  "Nexuiz   founder Lee Vermuelen, along with several other core developers, have licensed the Nexuiz name, Nexuiz.com domain, and DarkPlaces engine to Illfonic in a deal to get Nexuiz on consoles.
However, the kink is that the engine has been licensed for non-GPL usage.
That is, Illfonic has no intention of contributing their code back to the main GPL Nexuiz project.
As a result,  Nexuiz has been forked into a new project called Xonotic.
While the main Nexuiz site doesn't mention that Illfonic has no intention of contributing back, the Xonotic project FAQ explains what's going on.
Additionally, the Xonotic project states that Illfonic 'may be in violation of the GPL as most contributors to the Nexuiz codebase have not relicensed their work for inclusion in a closed-source project.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574196</id>
	<title>I hope...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269291120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that they get pwned by the GPL in a lawsuit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that they get pwned by the GPL in a lawsuit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that they get pwned by the GPL in a lawsuit...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, you hit the nail on the head.</p><p>If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.</p><p>GPL steps on its own foot so often its not even funny, do you realize what extremists GPL supporters have become?</p><p>Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.</p><p>Whats the difference between DRM and GPL?  GPL is DRM for developers, otherwise they are the same, a bunch of bullshit restrictions tacked on by someone who wants to pretend they're doing you all sorts of favors, but in the end aren't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , you hit the nail on the head.If you want to be safe , do n't use GPL license for your software , you 're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.GPL steps on its own foot so often its not even funny , do you realize what extremists GPL supporters have become ? Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.Whats the difference between DRM and GPL ?
GPL is DRM for developers , otherwise they are the same , a bunch of bullshit restrictions tacked on by someone who wants to pretend they 're doing you all sorts of favors , but in the end are n't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, you hit the nail on the head.If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.GPL steps on its own foot so often its not even funny, do you realize what extremists GPL supporters have become?Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.Whats the difference between DRM and GPL?
GPL is DRM for developers, otherwise they are the same, a bunch of bullshit restrictions tacked on by someone who wants to pretend they're doing you all sorts of favors, but in the end aren't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574728</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>g0bshiTe</author>
	<datestamp>1269249720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You must not live in the US, home of the free, where your freedom does have restrictions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You must not live in the US , home of the free , where your freedom does have restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must not live in the US, home of the free, where your freedom does have restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575732</id>
	<title>Re:Uninstalled</title>
	<author>fabzor3</author>
	<datestamp>1269253740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>serously man nexuiz never died, it just changed to a pronouncable name, upped the texture resolution and evicted the capitalist sellouts from the dev team, its the same feel to the gameplay, the same engine, same great net code.

you neednt worry we would never change the feel of the game, were simply updating it to keep up to date with new hardware</htmltext>
<tokenext>serously man nexuiz never died , it just changed to a pronouncable name , upped the texture resolution and evicted the capitalist sellouts from the dev team , its the same feel to the gameplay , the same engine , same great net code .
you neednt worry we would never change the feel of the game , were simply updating it to keep up to date with new hardware</tokentext>
<sentencetext>serously man nexuiz never died, it just changed to a pronouncable name, upped the texture resolution and evicted the capitalist sellouts from the dev team, its the same feel to the gameplay, the same engine, same great net code.
you neednt worry we would never change the feel of the game, were simply updating it to keep up to date with new hardware</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579270</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>i.r.id10t</author>
	<datestamp>1269276900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you choose a GPL base, and make modifications, you are under no obligation to share back your code - until you distribute.  And even then it doesn't have to be in a patch format....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you choose a GPL base , and make modifications , you are under no obligation to share back your code - until you distribute .
And even then it does n't have to be in a patch format... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you choose a GPL base, and make modifications, you are under no obligation to share back your code - until you distribute.
And even then it doesn't have to be in a patch format....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574504</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>yuhong</author>
	<datestamp>1269249000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the other hand, if copyright assignments has been done, they have the right to do this. If not, hopefully the contributors will sue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , if copyright assignments has been done , they have the right to do this .
If not , hopefully the contributors will sue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, if copyright assignments has been done, they have the right to do this.
If not, hopefully the contributors will sue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576702</id>
	<title>PC Version</title>
	<author>Lord\_Jeremy</author>
	<datestamp>1269257880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, from my understanding of this, all the cool crap going on at nexuiz.com is going to be for consoles only? What the hell? Maybe I'm misinformed but this looks a lot to me like some bozos taking an open source GPL'd engine and turning it into a closed source commercial product. I had to go check out wikipedia's page on the GPL to make sure I was remembering my licenses correctly. This really does look like a leeching off of a community effort. I don't really know how much of the Nexuiz codebase belongs to contributors, but I'm secretly hoping it's enough that these Illfonic guys don't get a free ride...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , from my understanding of this , all the cool crap going on at nexuiz.com is going to be for consoles only ?
What the hell ?
Maybe I 'm misinformed but this looks a lot to me like some bozos taking an open source GPL 'd engine and turning it into a closed source commercial product .
I had to go check out wikipedia 's page on the GPL to make sure I was remembering my licenses correctly .
This really does look like a leeching off of a community effort .
I do n't really know how much of the Nexuiz codebase belongs to contributors , but I 'm secretly hoping it 's enough that these Illfonic guys do n't get a free ride.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, from my understanding of this, all the cool crap going on at nexuiz.com is going to be for consoles only?
What the hell?
Maybe I'm misinformed but this looks a lot to me like some bozos taking an open source GPL'd engine and turning it into a closed source commercial product.
I had to go check out wikipedia's page on the GPL to make sure I was remembering my licenses correctly.
This really does look like a leeching off of a community effort.
I don't really know how much of the Nexuiz codebase belongs to contributors, but I'm secretly hoping it's enough that these Illfonic guys don't get a free ride...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576902</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269258960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>but in the end aren't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions.</i></p><p>Well, then don't use GPL'ed code.</p><p>Of course, companies like Apple wouldn't even exist without it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but in the end are n't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions.Well , then do n't use GPL'ed code.Of course , companies like Apple would n't even exist without it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but in the end aren't really giving you anything of value while effectively limiting your actions.Well, then don't use GPL'ed code.Of course, companies like Apple wouldn't even exist without it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575548</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Chyeld</author>
	<datestamp>1269253020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Yep, you hit the nail on the head.</p><p>If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.</p></div></blockquote><p>If you want to be 'safe' in your limited definition, simply require that all contributions that you accept into the 'primary fork' that you maintain be accompanied by a copyrights assignment to you or your company so that you can legally re-license those contributions. It's not rocket science, you don't own the code that other people contribute anymore than they 'own' the code you've contributed. You are perfectly within your rights to re-license your own code just as they are perfectly within their rights to refuse you permission to do the same with theirs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , you hit the nail on the head.If you want to be safe , do n't use GPL license for your software , you 're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.If you want to be 'safe ' in your limited definition , simply require that all contributions that you accept into the 'primary fork ' that you maintain be accompanied by a copyrights assignment to you or your company so that you can legally re-license those contributions .
It 's not rocket science , you do n't own the code that other people contribute anymore than they 'own ' the code you 've contributed .
You are perfectly within your rights to re-license your own code just as they are perfectly within their rights to refuse you permission to do the same with theirs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, you hit the nail on the head.If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.If you want to be 'safe' in your limited definition, simply require that all contributions that you accept into the 'primary fork' that you maintain be accompanied by a copyrights assignment to you or your company so that you can legally re-license those contributions.
It's not rocket science, you don't own the code that other people contribute anymore than they 'own' the code you've contributed.
You are perfectly within your rights to re-license your own code just as they are perfectly within their rights to refuse you permission to do the same with theirs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578174</id>
	<title>Re:Uninstalled</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1269266940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool - well then I'm in when Xonotic releases.<br>But calling me a 'little human' - well that is certainly a new kind of insult I guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool - well then I 'm in when Xonotic releases.But calling me a 'little human ' - well that is certainly a new kind of insult I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool - well then I'm in when Xonotic releases.But calling me a 'little human' - well that is certainly a new kind of insult I guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</id>
	<title>Some real info:</title>
	<author>Tei</author>
	<datestamp>1269250020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a lot of quake game engines, most of then have a single person behind.  Behind DarkPlaces is Lord Havoc.</p><ul><li>Lord Havoc plan to commit to the GPL DarkPlaces version all the features that are worth it.  This excluse any SDK bit, since the PS3 SDK EULA don't able to share that part. This mean that even if Illfonic will not contribute, Lord Havoc will, and that is what is important. </li><li>Illfonic have a license to use the engine from Id Software.  And a license from Lord Havoc.  If theres part for other people, will be removed/replaced by Lord Havoc code. The result will be a fully legal and Illfonic licensed closed source version of DarkPlaces</li><li>The new version of Nexuiz for consoles seems awesome. This is only good news for Nexuiz, that will get more exposure, more code<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,... </li></ul><p>We normally see the other route,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... a closed source game (Quake engine from Quake) open source his engine. A open source game is created from a closed source game (FreeCiv from Civ ).  This route is "new",   a open source game spawns a closed source game.</p><p>There has ben some discussions on the forums, but It has been mostly about the use of the name. Is like how Firefox started as Phoenix so got renamed to Firebird...  (only to be renamed again to Firefox!).  But this time Illfonic let the community continue using the name.. . Of course, some people really dislike the very idea<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/.  To this date, not contributor has claimed steal code or something like that.</p><p>Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now (And If you have work on a open source project, you know how hard is to get people moving forward). I have only good things to say about Lord Havoc and the very high quality of his code.  He control all the code of DarkPlaces to be of the best quality possible, this mean rewriting things to get to his standard of quality. Is this rewriting all code that probably has made possible to closed-source the engine.</p><p>HOW?</p><p>1) You get the original source code from the Id Software FTP, and a license for it (probably legacy, since is not for sale now).<br>2) You put all that code in the CVS. This code is the original, and you have a license for it.<br>3) Lord Havoc commit all his code changes to this CVS. Since he own his own changes (he is the author of these changes) he can do it.<br>4) The resulting code is both authored by Id Software and Lord Havoc.<br>5) This code is licensed by Lord Havoc to Illphonic (Illphonic already have a license from Id Software).<br>6) If theres some code from other authors, Illphonic acquire rights from these authors.<br>7) TADA!... you have a closed source engine you can use to create games for XBox 360 and Playstation 3 (I suppose lots of changes are needed to achieve this compatibility, but you have the basics of the engine).</p><p>The authors of a work can "relicense" his work. This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license. Lord Havoc is the same as Id Software, so is doing the exact same thing, releasing his work on a different license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of quake game engines , most of then have a single person behind .
Behind DarkPlaces is Lord Havoc.Lord Havoc plan to commit to the GPL DarkPlaces version all the features that are worth it .
This excluse any SDK bit , since the PS3 SDK EULA do n't able to share that part .
This mean that even if Illfonic will not contribute , Lord Havoc will , and that is what is important .
Illfonic have a license to use the engine from Id Software .
And a license from Lord Havoc .
If theres part for other people , will be removed/replaced by Lord Havoc code .
The result will be a fully legal and Illfonic licensed closed source version of DarkPlacesThe new version of Nexuiz for consoles seems awesome .
This is only good news for Nexuiz , that will get more exposure , more code ,... We normally see the other route , ... a closed source game ( Quake engine from Quake ) open source his engine .
A open source game is created from a closed source game ( FreeCiv from Civ ) .
This route is " new " , a open source game spawns a closed source game.There has ben some discussions on the forums , but It has been mostly about the use of the name .
Is like how Firefox started as Phoenix so got renamed to Firebird... ( only to be renamed again to Firefox ! ) .
But this time Illfonic let the community continue using the name.. . Of course , some people really dislike the very idea : -/ .
To this date , not contributor has claimed steal code or something like that.Vermeulen is a hardworking individual , and has push this game ( nexuiz ) for more than 9 years now ( And If you have work on a open source project , you know how hard is to get people moving forward ) .
I have only good things to say about Lord Havoc and the very high quality of his code .
He control all the code of DarkPlaces to be of the best quality possible , this mean rewriting things to get to his standard of quality .
Is this rewriting all code that probably has made possible to closed-source the engine.HOW ? 1 ) You get the original source code from the Id Software FTP , and a license for it ( probably legacy , since is not for sale now ) .2 ) You put all that code in the CVS .
This code is the original , and you have a license for it.3 ) Lord Havoc commit all his code changes to this CVS .
Since he own his own changes ( he is the author of these changes ) he can do it.4 ) The resulting code is both authored by Id Software and Lord Havoc.5 ) This code is licensed by Lord Havoc to Illphonic ( Illphonic already have a license from Id Software ) .6 ) If theres some code from other authors , Illphonic acquire rights from these authors.7 ) TADA ! .. .
you have a closed source engine you can use to create games for XBox 360 and Playstation 3 ( I suppose lots of changes are needed to achieve this compatibility , but you have the basics of the engine ) .The authors of a work can " relicense " his work .
This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license .
Lord Havoc is the same as Id Software , so is doing the exact same thing , releasing his work on a different license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of quake game engines, most of then have a single person behind.
Behind DarkPlaces is Lord Havoc.Lord Havoc plan to commit to the GPL DarkPlaces version all the features that are worth it.
This excluse any SDK bit, since the PS3 SDK EULA don't able to share that part.
This mean that even if Illfonic will not contribute, Lord Havoc will, and that is what is important.
Illfonic have a license to use the engine from Id Software.
And a license from Lord Havoc.
If theres part for other people, will be removed/replaced by Lord Havoc code.
The result will be a fully legal and Illfonic licensed closed source version of DarkPlacesThe new version of Nexuiz for consoles seems awesome.
This is only good news for Nexuiz, that will get more exposure, more code ,... We normally see the other route, ... a closed source game (Quake engine from Quake) open source his engine.
A open source game is created from a closed source game (FreeCiv from Civ ).
This route is "new",   a open source game spawns a closed source game.There has ben some discussions on the forums, but It has been mostly about the use of the name.
Is like how Firefox started as Phoenix so got renamed to Firebird...  (only to be renamed again to Firefox!).
But this time Illfonic let the community continue using the name.. . Of course, some people really dislike the very idea :-/.
To this date, not contributor has claimed steal code or something like that.Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now (And If you have work on a open source project, you know how hard is to get people moving forward).
I have only good things to say about Lord Havoc and the very high quality of his code.
He control all the code of DarkPlaces to be of the best quality possible, this mean rewriting things to get to his standard of quality.
Is this rewriting all code that probably has made possible to closed-source the engine.HOW?1) You get the original source code from the Id Software FTP, and a license for it (probably legacy, since is not for sale now).2) You put all that code in the CVS.
This code is the original, and you have a license for it.3) Lord Havoc commit all his code changes to this CVS.
Since he own his own changes (he is the author of these changes) he can do it.4) The resulting code is both authored by Id Software and Lord Havoc.5) This code is licensed by Lord Havoc to Illphonic (Illphonic already have a license from Id Software).6) If theres some code from other authors, Illphonic acquire rights from these authors.7) TADA!...
you have a closed source engine you can use to create games for XBox 360 and Playstation 3 (I suppose lots of changes are needed to achieve this compatibility, but you have the basics of the engine).The authors of a work can "relicense" his work.
This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license.
Lord Havoc is the same as Id Software, so is doing the exact same thing, releasing his work on a different license.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575968</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>Dark\_Matter88</author>
	<datestamp>1269254760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can see your points, all valid, but the name bit really bugs me. I hope to see Xenotic fix some basic problems that i dont think nexuiz GPL could, a refreshed project with a new name gets the chance to do so much more than an iterated improvement. As much as it was awesome, the new project is a new start from which modern gameplay improvements and a consistent style and theme can be introduced. Personally, I would love to see a theme introduced and perhaps a backstory...going even further down the pipe of dreams, a single player campaign would be cool...even if its a separate game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see your points , all valid , but the name bit really bugs me .
I hope to see Xenotic fix some basic problems that i dont think nexuiz GPL could , a refreshed project with a new name gets the chance to do so much more than an iterated improvement .
As much as it was awesome , the new project is a new start from which modern gameplay improvements and a consistent style and theme can be introduced .
Personally , I would love to see a theme introduced and perhaps a backstory...going even further down the pipe of dreams , a single player campaign would be cool...even if its a separate game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see your points, all valid, but the name bit really bugs me.
I hope to see Xenotic fix some basic problems that i dont think nexuiz GPL could, a refreshed project with a new name gets the chance to do so much more than an iterated improvement.
As much as it was awesome, the new project is a new start from which modern gameplay improvements and a consistent style and theme can be introduced.
Personally, I would love to see a theme introduced and perhaps a backstory...going even further down the pipe of dreams, a single player campaign would be cool...even if its a separate game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574482</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>FooAtWFU</author>
	<datestamp>1269248880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Leaches? They're like a percolating liquid flowing through the GPL code and dissolving bits and pieces of it to carry away (and possibly pollute the surrounding code environment)?
</p><p>
Or did you mean the parasites?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Leaches ?
They 're like a percolating liquid flowing through the GPL code and dissolving bits and pieces of it to carry away ( and possibly pollute the surrounding code environment ) ?
Or did you mean the parasites ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Leaches?
They're like a percolating liquid flowing through the GPL code and dissolving bits and pieces of it to carry away (and possibly pollute the surrounding code environment)?
Or did you mean the parasites?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574516</id>
	<title>Hello jizz lovers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GPL is shit.  Capeech?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL is shit .
Capeech ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL is shit.
Capeech?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575420</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269252480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GPL is about freedom for the USERS, not for the developers. So that USERS of the code, always have the freedom to modify (or find someone that can modify) the code to suit their needs as USERS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL is about freedom for the USERS , not for the developers .
So that USERS of the code , always have the freedom to modify ( or find someone that can modify ) the code to suit their needs as USERS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL is about freedom for the USERS, not for the developers.
So that USERS of the code, always have the freedom to modify (or find someone that can modify) the code to suit their needs as USERS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576060</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1269255240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
You left out:
</p><p>
6.5) If there's still code in there that was contributed by somebody who can't or won't allow it to go closed/proprietary, rewrite it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You left out : 6.5 ) If there 's still code in there that was contributed by somebody who ca n't or wo n't allow it to go closed/proprietary , rewrite it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You left out:

6.5) If there's still code in there that was contributed by somebody who can't or won't allow it to go closed/proprietary, rewrite it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576374</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269256440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  The GPL is not free, it's ultra left-wing communist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
The GPL is not free , it 's ultra left-wing communist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
The GPL is not free, it's ultra left-wing communist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1269252600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You're right. Only BSD-style "do what you like, but don't sue us" licenses mean true freedom</i></p><p>No, they do not.  When someone takes code licensed under the BSD license and distributes it binary only, they limit everybody else's freedom to study, modify, enhance, and interoperate with that code.  That is less freedom than under the GPL, not more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
Only BSD-style " do what you like , but do n't sue us " licenses mean true freedomNo , they do not .
When someone takes code licensed under the BSD license and distributes it binary only , they limit everybody else 's freedom to study , modify , enhance , and interoperate with that code .
That is less freedom than under the GPL , not more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
Only BSD-style "do what you like, but don't sue us" licenses mean true freedomNo, they do not.
When someone takes code licensed under the BSD license and distributes it binary only, they limit everybody else's freedom to study, modify, enhance, and interoperate with that code.
That is less freedom than under the GPL, not more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576406</id>
	<title>Re:Much ado over nothing.</title>
	<author>Again</author>
	<datestamp>1269256560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe not as an in-store game but if this game gets sold as an online downloadable game that costs 10 bucks it might end up being popular.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe not as an in-store game but if this game gets sold as an online downloadable game that costs 10 bucks it might end up being popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe not as an in-store game but if this game gets sold as an online downloadable game that costs 10 bucks it might end up being popular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574856</id>
	<title>Who Cares?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269250200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is anyone really all that interested in a game that started out as a Quake mod in 2001? Anyone other than open source bigots who are excited that they can play a game and it's totally free?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone really all that interested in a game that started out as a Quake mod in 2001 ?
Anyone other than open source bigots who are excited that they can play a game and it 's totally free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone really all that interested in a game that started out as a Quake mod in 2001?
Anyone other than open source bigots who are excited that they can play a game and it's totally free?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574642</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1269249420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Modding down into oblivion in 5..  4... 3... 2...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Modding down into oblivion in 5.. 4... 3... 2.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Modding down into oblivion in 5..  4... 3... 2...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578214</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Doctor\_Jest</author>
	<datestamp>1269267180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Technically, no.  The definition is free to do with YOUR code what YOU please, but for other's code, you are not free do trample their freedoms to satisfy yours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically , no .
The definition is free to do with YOUR code what YOU please , but for other 's code , you are not free do trample their freedoms to satisfy yours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically, no.
The definition is free to do with YOUR code what YOU please, but for other's code, you are not free do trample their freedoms to satisfy yours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31583156</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>ffreeloader</author>
	<datestamp>1269357120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no freedom without restrictions.  My right to punch you stops where your nose begins.  My right to free speech stops where your right to not be libeled and slandered begins.  Your right to do as you please with my property ends where my right to do with I please with my property begins.</p><p>Freedom without respect for the rights of others is lunacy.  It leads to very bad ends.  It ends with total lawlessness and might makes right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no freedom without restrictions .
My right to punch you stops where your nose begins .
My right to free speech stops where your right to not be libeled and slandered begins .
Your right to do as you please with my property ends where my right to do with I please with my property begins.Freedom without respect for the rights of others is lunacy .
It leads to very bad ends .
It ends with total lawlessness and might makes right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no freedom without restrictions.
My right to punch you stops where your nose begins.
My right to free speech stops where your right to not be libeled and slandered begins.
Your right to do as you please with my property ends where my right to do with I please with my property begins.Freedom without respect for the rights of others is lunacy.
It leads to very bad ends.
It ends with total lawlessness and might makes right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581700</id>
	<title>Wrong.</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1269350220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So while you have free use of the code in question, everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it.</p><p>Wrong. Only if you give them the resulting binaries do you have to make them a written offer to give them the code through the same means they received the binaries with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So while you have free use of the code in question , everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it.Wrong .
Only if you give them the resulting binaries do you have to make them a written offer to give them the code through the same means they received the binaries with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So while you have free use of the code in question, everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it.Wrong.
Only if you give them the resulting binaries do you have to make them a written offer to give them the code through the same means they received the binaries with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574790</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.</p></div><p>Exactly!  If this project had only been BSD licensed, the developer could have just walked away with the code and never contributed anything back.  Or heck - anyone could.  Businesses should take note.  Develop with BSD licenses so your competitors get your work for free!  That's obviously the best way to do things and avoids all this "virus" GPL stuff.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.Exactly !
If this project had only been BSD licensed , the developer could have just walked away with the code and never contributed anything back .
Or heck - anyone could .
Businesses should take note .
Develop with BSD licenses so your competitors get your work for free !
That 's obviously the best way to do things and avoids all this " virus " GPL stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do youself a favor and use a license for your code that actually does have an open spirit rather than a built in virus.Exactly!
If this project had only been BSD licensed, the developer could have just walked away with the code and never contributed anything back.
Or heck - anyone could.
Businesses should take note.
Develop with BSD licenses so your competitors get your work for free!
That's obviously the best way to do things and avoids all this "virus" GPL stuff.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468</id>
	<title>Uninstalled</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1269252780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I love playing Nexiuz I can't really support this move. It's off my PC and will never return. I'm sure no-one really cares, but I do, and I guess that's what it's all about in the end - what I can live with.<br>If PS3 is closed - then DON'T RELEASE TO IT...<br>Back to BZFlag...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I love playing Nexiuz I ca n't really support this move .
It 's off my PC and will never return .
I 'm sure no-one really cares , but I do , and I guess that 's what it 's all about in the end - what I can live with.If PS3 is closed - then DO N'T RELEASE TO IT...Back to BZFlag.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I love playing Nexiuz I can't really support this move.
It's off my PC and will never return.
I'm sure no-one really cares, but I do, and I guess that's what it's all about in the end - what I can live with.If PS3 is closed - then DON'T RELEASE TO IT...Back to BZFlag...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581750</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1269350580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.</p></div><p>Your freedom to walk down the street unharmed restricts me from punching you in the face.</p><p>Total, absolute freedom might work in the self-regulating anarchisms Robert A. Heinlein wrote about, but even there, people were restricting themselves. By their own free will, granted; but still.</p><p>The moral: There are \_always\_ restrictions. And that is a good thing. Which particular set you prefer... Now \_that\_ is open for debate<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Your freedom to walk down the street unharmed restricts me from punching you in the face.Total , absolute freedom might work in the self-regulating anarchisms Robert A. Heinlein wrote about , but even there , people were restricting themselves .
By their own free will , granted ; but still.The moral : There are \ _always \ _ restrictions .
And that is a good thing .
Which particular set you prefer... Now \ _that \ _ is open for debate : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Your freedom to walk down the street unharmed restricts me from punching you in the face.Total, absolute freedom might work in the self-regulating anarchisms Robert A. Heinlein wrote about, but even there, people were restricting themselves.
By their own free will, granted; but still.The moral: There are \_always\_ restrictions.
And that is a good thing.
Which particular set you prefer... Now \_that\_ is open for debate :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576258</id>
	<title>The great quake mangle.</title>
	<author>GiMP</author>
	<datestamp>1269256080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From approximately 1999 through 2002, I worked on the Quakeforge project.  Amongst other things, I added some special effects, gzip file loading, and maintained ports to Irix, Solaris, and PowerPC Linux.</p><p>The greatest problem that Quake has is legacy.  This is an old code base with numerous forks and a great amount of code sharing between projects.  Closing the source to a Quake engine is like opening the source of a commercial Unix, you've got code from all over the place and you're not sure where it came from.</p><p>When I first heard that Darkplaces / Nexuiz was closing the source, I spent half a day reviewing their source to determine if any of my own code had been included.  That search resulted in a determination that the project definitely contained my code at one point, but I could no longer recognize any offending bits.  Still, I'm not entirely certain that my code has been entirely removed. The work on ports was particularly concerning to me as non-portable code can exist throughout a code base, I could potentially have a single character infringed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>At the end of the day, however, I'm not really against this as long as they can account for the code and settle with the independent contributors.  They have at least appeared to resolve this amicably with the contributors, unlike the <a href="http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/quake/qlfiles/" title="pulo.com.au">ill-fated QuakeLives project</a> [pulo.com.au] which, in 2000, very clearly violated the GPL, prompting outrage within the Quake developer community and within id software itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From approximately 1999 through 2002 , I worked on the Quakeforge project .
Amongst other things , I added some special effects , gzip file loading , and maintained ports to Irix , Solaris , and PowerPC Linux.The greatest problem that Quake has is legacy .
This is an old code base with numerous forks and a great amount of code sharing between projects .
Closing the source to a Quake engine is like opening the source of a commercial Unix , you 've got code from all over the place and you 're not sure where it came from.When I first heard that Darkplaces / Nexuiz was closing the source , I spent half a day reviewing their source to determine if any of my own code had been included .
That search resulted in a determination that the project definitely contained my code at one point , but I could no longer recognize any offending bits .
Still , I 'm not entirely certain that my code has been entirely removed .
The work on ports was particularly concerning to me as non-portable code can exist throughout a code base , I could potentially have a single character infringed .
; - ) At the end of the day , however , I 'm not really against this as long as they can account for the code and settle with the independent contributors .
They have at least appeared to resolve this amicably with the contributors , unlike the ill-fated QuakeLives project [ pulo.com.au ] which , in 2000 , very clearly violated the GPL , prompting outrage within the Quake developer community and within id software itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From approximately 1999 through 2002, I worked on the Quakeforge project.
Amongst other things, I added some special effects, gzip file loading, and maintained ports to Irix, Solaris, and PowerPC Linux.The greatest problem that Quake has is legacy.
This is an old code base with numerous forks and a great amount of code sharing between projects.
Closing the source to a Quake engine is like opening the source of a commercial Unix, you've got code from all over the place and you're not sure where it came from.When I first heard that Darkplaces / Nexuiz was closing the source, I spent half a day reviewing their source to determine if any of my own code had been included.
That search resulted in a determination that the project definitely contained my code at one point, but I could no longer recognize any offending bits.
Still, I'm not entirely certain that my code has been entirely removed.
The work on ports was particularly concerning to me as non-portable code can exist throughout a code base, I could potentially have a single character infringed.
;-)At the end of the day, however, I'm not really against this as long as they can account for the code and settle with the independent contributors.
They have at least appeared to resolve this amicably with the contributors, unlike the ill-fated QuakeLives project [pulo.com.au] which, in 2000, very clearly violated the GPL, prompting outrage within the Quake developer community and within id software itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575030</id>
	<title>Welcome to Capitalism</title>
	<author>Orga</author>
	<datestamp>1269250860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Making money off the backs of others is the American way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Making money off the backs of others is the American way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Making money off the backs of others is the American way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581664</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269349980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now (And If you have work on a open source project, you know how hard is to get people moving forward).</p></div><p>As the Nexuiz community sees it, Lee Vermeulen has stopped contributing regularly to the project four years ago and now cashes in on the hard work of many contributors.</p><p>See the Nexuiz community statement at <a href="http://alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&amp;t=6079" title="alientrap.org" rel="nofollow">http://alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&amp;t=6079</a> [alientrap.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Vermeulen is a hardworking individual , and has push this game ( nexuiz ) for more than 9 years now ( And If you have work on a open source project , you know how hard is to get people moving forward ) .As the Nexuiz community sees it , Lee Vermeulen has stopped contributing regularly to the project four years ago and now cashes in on the hard work of many contributors.See the Nexuiz community statement at http : //alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php ? f = 4&amp;t = 6079 [ alientrap.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now (And If you have work on a open source project, you know how hard is to get people moving forward).As the Nexuiz community sees it, Lee Vermeulen has stopped contributing regularly to the project four years ago and now cashes in on the hard work of many contributors.See the Nexuiz community statement at http://alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&amp;t=6079 [alientrap.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</id>
	<title>You must have an different definition of freedom</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1269248880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One different than the one I do.</p><p>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One different than the one I do.Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One different than the one I do.Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575192</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>AvitarX</author>
	<datestamp>1269251520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We can argue about degrees of freeness, but the fact that there were debates about the use of drivers (wireless I think), from BSD into Linux, I think it is fair to say there are restrictions implied in BSD too.</p><p>Note, I think it is 100\% fair to say that BSD is more free for the recipient than GPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We can argue about degrees of freeness , but the fact that there were debates about the use of drivers ( wireless I think ) , from BSD into Linux , I think it is fair to say there are restrictions implied in BSD too.Note , I think it is 100 \ % fair to say that BSD is more free for the recipient than GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can argue about degrees of freeness, but the fact that there were debates about the use of drivers (wireless I think), from BSD into Linux, I think it is fair to say there are restrictions implied in BSD too.Note, I think it is 100\% fair to say that BSD is more free for the recipient than GPL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581816</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>RichiH</author>
	<datestamp>1269350880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the various authors waived their rights (where possible. Impossible in Germany, for example) or similar when contributing, Nexuiz is within their rights.</p><p>If a single commit was made under the GPL exclusively, they need to ask the contributors to re-license, to re-implement or omit the relevant parts or they must not re-license the whole thing.</p><p>I don't know about the project's internals so I can not decide either way, but theory behind this is trivial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the various authors waived their rights ( where possible .
Impossible in Germany , for example ) or similar when contributing , Nexuiz is within their rights.If a single commit was made under the GPL exclusively , they need to ask the contributors to re-license , to re-implement or omit the relevant parts or they must not re-license the whole thing.I do n't know about the project 's internals so I can not decide either way , but theory behind this is trivial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the various authors waived their rights (where possible.
Impossible in Germany, for example) or similar when contributing, Nexuiz is within their rights.If a single commit was made under the GPL exclusively, they need to ask the contributors to re-license, to re-implement or omit the relevant parts or they must not re-license the whole thing.I don't know about the project's internals so I can not decide either way, but theory behind this is trivial.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574958</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1269250560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One different than the one I do. Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.</i></p><p>Freedom always comes with restrictions if it is just and equal, because your freedom to do something often implies a restriction or cost for me.  The GPL ensures that all the contributors have a common set of freedoms, but those translate into restrictions as well.</p><p>The Apache and BSD licenses ensure that all the contributors have a different set of freedoms, and a different set of limitations placed on them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One different than the one I do .
Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Freedom always comes with restrictions if it is just and equal , because your freedom to do something often implies a restriction or cost for me .
The GPL ensures that all the contributors have a common set of freedoms , but those translate into restrictions as well.The Apache and BSD licenses ensure that all the contributors have a different set of freedoms , and a different set of limitations placed on them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One different than the one I do.
Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Freedom always comes with restrictions if it is just and equal, because your freedom to do something often implies a restriction or cost for me.
The GPL ensures that all the contributors have a common set of freedoms, but those translate into restrictions as well.The Apache and BSD licenses ensure that all the contributors have a different set of freedoms, and a different set of limitations placed on them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576956</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269259200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True freedom means I can cap your ass with a Glowk fotay and no one cares except someone bigger and meaner than me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True freedom means I can cap your ass with a Glowk fotay and no one cares except someone bigger and meaner than me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True freedom means I can cap your ass with a Glowk fotay and no one cares except someone bigger and meaner than me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575578</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269253140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The general argument over the restrictions in GPL that bother people revolve entirely around the fact that GPL tries to make everything else exactly like itself.</p><p>If you want to use GPL you have to be GPL, nothing else is acceptable!  No exceptions, and my god will the uber geeks with no life go off on you if you make one little mistake.  You won't even know someone found a snippet of GPL code in your stuff before you've been DDoSed off the Internet.</p><p>GPL people are almost in entirety fanatical idiots.  There are a few people and companies that aren't, but they are few and far between and for every good thing they do, there are 50 idiot things that GPL fanboys do to scare everyone else off.</p><p>Even Microsoft will let you use their code with other peoples code under different license agreements, they may not let their code be open, but they don't prevent you from using it just because you want to use some other open source block of code.  Conversely, with GPL not only does all the code have to be open, it pretty much HAS to be GPL or a GPL derivative.</p><p>When Microsoft is more open and less restrictive than you are, then you need to take a deep breath and think before the next time you brag about how open or free your virus of a license is.</p><p>GPL isn't a license, its an infection, and thats the sticking point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The general argument over the restrictions in GPL that bother people revolve entirely around the fact that GPL tries to make everything else exactly like itself.If you want to use GPL you have to be GPL , nothing else is acceptable !
No exceptions , and my god will the uber geeks with no life go off on you if you make one little mistake .
You wo n't even know someone found a snippet of GPL code in your stuff before you 've been DDoSed off the Internet.GPL people are almost in entirety fanatical idiots .
There are a few people and companies that are n't , but they are few and far between and for every good thing they do , there are 50 idiot things that GPL fanboys do to scare everyone else off.Even Microsoft will let you use their code with other peoples code under different license agreements , they may not let their code be open , but they do n't prevent you from using it just because you want to use some other open source block of code .
Conversely , with GPL not only does all the code have to be open , it pretty much HAS to be GPL or a GPL derivative.When Microsoft is more open and less restrictive than you are , then you need to take a deep breath and think before the next time you brag about how open or free your virus of a license is.GPL is n't a license , its an infection , and thats the sticking point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The general argument over the restrictions in GPL that bother people revolve entirely around the fact that GPL tries to make everything else exactly like itself.If you want to use GPL you have to be GPL, nothing else is acceptable!
No exceptions, and my god will the uber geeks with no life go off on you if you make one little mistake.
You won't even know someone found a snippet of GPL code in your stuff before you've been DDoSed off the Internet.GPL people are almost in entirety fanatical idiots.
There are a few people and companies that aren't, but they are few and far between and for every good thing they do, there are 50 idiot things that GPL fanboys do to scare everyone else off.Even Microsoft will let you use their code with other peoples code under different license agreements, they may not let their code be open, but they don't prevent you from using it just because you want to use some other open source block of code.
Conversely, with GPL not only does all the code have to be open, it pretty much HAS to be GPL or a GPL derivative.When Microsoft is more open and less restrictive than you are, then you need to take a deep breath and think before the next time you brag about how open or free your virus of a license is.GPL isn't a license, its an infection, and thats the sticking point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577976</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269265380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BSD license is true freedom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BSD license is true freedom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BSD license is true freedom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581548</id>
	<title>Loolz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269348540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loolz</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loolz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loolz</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574224</id>
	<title>Interested in seeing where this goes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269291240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was surprised when I heard about this.  I'll definitely be following it closely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was surprised when I heard about this .
I 'll definitely be following it closely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was surprised when I heard about this.
I'll definitely be following it closely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574618</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1269249300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone mod this pathetic troll down.</p><p>DRM restricts use, GPL does not.<br>Futhermore these Nexuiz idiots are not the creators of this code, it comes from quake 1.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone mod this pathetic troll down.DRM restricts use , GPL does not.Futhermore these Nexuiz idiots are not the creators of this code , it comes from quake 1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone mod this pathetic troll down.DRM restricts use, GPL does not.Futhermore these Nexuiz idiots are not the creators of this code, it comes from quake 1.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574986</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1269250680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be completely free is to be a slave to one's own temptations. Likewise, to protect the freedom of the community, restrictions are voluntarily accepted by participants. Similar to how you may want to stab people, but get together with a bunch of other people and make it illegal since you don't want to get stabbed.</p><p>That said, I personally wouldn't use the term "free" to describe the GPL. It seems to me more like a self-interested unit for the benefit of its members. If you work at a for-profit, you can generally reuse internal code for company projects. Think of this as a company for tinkerers. I'm a big fan of the GPL, but I'm not sure free is the best word choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be completely free is to be a slave to one 's own temptations .
Likewise , to protect the freedom of the community , restrictions are voluntarily accepted by participants .
Similar to how you may want to stab people , but get together with a bunch of other people and make it illegal since you do n't want to get stabbed.That said , I personally would n't use the term " free " to describe the GPL .
It seems to me more like a self-interested unit for the benefit of its members .
If you work at a for-profit , you can generally reuse internal code for company projects .
Think of this as a company for tinkerers .
I 'm a big fan of the GPL , but I 'm not sure free is the best word choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be completely free is to be a slave to one's own temptations.
Likewise, to protect the freedom of the community, restrictions are voluntarily accepted by participants.
Similar to how you may want to stab people, but get together with a bunch of other people and make it illegal since you don't want to get stabbed.That said, I personally wouldn't use the term "free" to describe the GPL.
It seems to me more like a self-interested unit for the benefit of its members.
If you work at a for-profit, you can generally reuse internal code for company projects.
Think of this as a company for tinkerers.
I'm a big fan of the GPL, but I'm not sure free is the best word choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575568</id>
	<title>Much ado over nothing.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269253140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're going through all of this work for nothing.   Games of this style do not sell well anymore.  It's a niche genre at best these days.  It's not the late 90's or early 2000's.
<br>
<br>
Ask Epic how Unreal Tournament 3 did.  People don't seem to want the arcade style Quake/UT shooters anymore.   If they want to succeed they need to update other things besides the engine...  The only non-realistic online shooter that has done well at all in the past few years is Team Fortress 2.   Good luck competing with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're going through all of this work for nothing .
Games of this style do not sell well anymore .
It 's a niche genre at best these days .
It 's not the late 90 's or early 2000 's .
Ask Epic how Unreal Tournament 3 did .
People do n't seem to want the arcade style Quake/UT shooters anymore .
If they want to succeed they need to update other things besides the engine... The only non-realistic online shooter that has done well at all in the past few years is Team Fortress 2 .
Good luck competing with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're going through all of this work for nothing.
Games of this style do not sell well anymore.
It's a niche genre at best these days.
It's not the late 90's or early 2000's.
Ask Epic how Unreal Tournament 3 did.
People don't seem to want the arcade style Quake/UT shooters anymore.
If they want to succeed they need to update other things besides the engine...  The only non-realistic online shooter that has done well at all in the past few years is Team Fortress 2.
Good luck competing with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574844</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1269250140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*ALL* freedom comes with restrictions.  Sorry, that's a part of the nature of the universe.  You can't even explicitly define a freedom that doesn't have restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* ALL * freedom comes with restrictions .
Sorry , that 's a part of the nature of the universe .
You ca n't even explicitly define a freedom that does n't have restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*ALL* freedom comes with restrictions.
Sorry, that's a part of the nature of the universe.
You can't even explicitly define a freedom that doesn't have restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577634</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1269263220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any and all definitions of "freedom" come with restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any and all definitions of " freedom " come with restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any and all definitions of "freedom" come with restrictions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574732</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe he's using the <a href="http://freedomdefined.org/" title="freedomdefined.org">conventional definition</a> [freedomdefined.org] of freedom.  I don't know what definition you're using...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe he 's using the conventional definition [ freedomdefined.org ] of freedom .
I do n't know what definition you 're using.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe he's using the conventional definition [freedomdefined.org] of freedom.
I don't know what definition you're using...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575440</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Bruce Perens</author>
	<datestamp>1269252600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh. Do you not believe you are free unless you have the right to keep slaves, then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh .
Do you not believe you are free unless you have the right to keep slaves , then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh.
Do you not believe you are free unless you have the right to keep slaves, then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575212</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>BrentH</author>
	<datestamp>1269251580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I never understand this argument. People always talk of freedom without personal pronouns, which makes the argument moot. There's no such thing as 'freedom', there's only my, your, our freedom. The BSD protects someones freedom pretty damn totally, and the GPL protects everyones freedom at the cost of basically not allowing you to distribute binaries without source. Trying to compare these in 'freedomness' is moronic: it's literally comparing apples and oranges.<br> <br>
Now I don't know if 'freedom' is shorthand for either of these, but if it's a measure of importance (which is more important, my or our freedom) I'd argue <i>our</i> freedom is more important (thus, the GPL). Just like how one mans ability to rule himself (monarchy) is less important than our ability to rule ourselves (democracy), even if it is at a small cost (I actually <i>can</i> do less than a king).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I never understand this argument .
People always talk of freedom without personal pronouns , which makes the argument moot .
There 's no such thing as 'freedom ' , there 's only my , your , our freedom .
The BSD protects someones freedom pretty damn totally , and the GPL protects everyones freedom at the cost of basically not allowing you to distribute binaries without source .
Trying to compare these in 'freedomness ' is moronic : it 's literally comparing apples and oranges .
Now I do n't know if 'freedom ' is shorthand for either of these , but if it 's a measure of importance ( which is more important , my or our freedom ) I 'd argue our freedom is more important ( thus , the GPL ) .
Just like how one mans ability to rule himself ( monarchy ) is less important than our ability to rule ourselves ( democracy ) , even if it is at a small cost ( I actually can do less than a king ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never understand this argument.
People always talk of freedom without personal pronouns, which makes the argument moot.
There's no such thing as 'freedom', there's only my, your, our freedom.
The BSD protects someones freedom pretty damn totally, and the GPL protects everyones freedom at the cost of basically not allowing you to distribute binaries without source.
Trying to compare these in 'freedomness' is moronic: it's literally comparing apples and oranges.
Now I don't know if 'freedom' is shorthand for either of these, but if it's a measure of importance (which is more important, my or our freedom) I'd argue our freedom is more important (thus, the GPL).
Just like how one mans ability to rule himself (monarchy) is less important than our ability to rule ourselves (democracy), even if it is at a small cost (I actually can do less than a king).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>cupantae</author>
	<datestamp>1269250020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right. Only BSD-style "do what you like, but don't sue us" licenses mean <i>true</i> freedom (unless you consider the right to sue somebody who did the work for you a necessary freedom). However, it is completely fair to say that the GNU GPL encourages continued freedom of access and use. If you invite someone into your house, you don't expect them to sell your stuff. If you violate the spirit of kindness that someone has shown to you, then you should be criticised.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
Only BSD-style " do what you like , but do n't sue us " licenses mean true freedom ( unless you consider the right to sue somebody who did the work for you a necessary freedom ) .
However , it is completely fair to say that the GNU GPL encourages continued freedom of access and use .
If you invite someone into your house , you do n't expect them to sell your stuff .
If you violate the spirit of kindness that someone has shown to you , then you should be criticised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
Only BSD-style "do what you like, but don't sue us" licenses mean true freedom (unless you consider the right to sue somebody who did the work for you a necessary freedom).
However, it is completely fair to say that the GNU GPL encourages continued freedom of access and use.
If you invite someone into your house, you don't expect them to sell your stuff.
If you violate the spirit of kindness that someone has shown to you, then you should be criticised.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576522</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269257040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, but Vermeulen had not been "hard working" and "pushing" Nexuiz in over 4 years.  He always has been a bit of a leacher of others talents anyway.  He really contributed very little to the game at all, even when he was active.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , but Vermeulen had not been " hard working " and " pushing " Nexuiz in over 4 years .
He always has been a bit of a leacher of others talents anyway .
He really contributed very little to the game at all , even when he was active .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, but Vermeulen had not been "hard working" and "pushing" Nexuiz in over 4 years.
He always has been a bit of a leacher of others talents anyway.
He really contributed very little to the game at all, even when he was active.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579726</id>
	<title>They got forked...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269281520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and they are getting forked up now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and they are getting forked up now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and they are getting forked up now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you wanted true freedom you shouldn't've used code licensed under the GPL. The GPL's interpretation of "freedom" is freedom for EVERYONE, not just for YOU. So while you have free use of the code in question, everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it. The idea is that if we leave it up to peoples' good wills to ensure freedom, we'll all live in slavery, so we'll legally force everyone to let everyone else be free. Seems to be working out OK.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you wanted true freedom you should n't've used code licensed under the GPL .
The GPL 's interpretation of " freedom " is freedom for EVERYONE , not just for YOU .
So while you have free use of the code in question , everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it .
The idea is that if we leave it up to peoples ' good wills to ensure freedom , we 'll all live in slavery , so we 'll legally force everyone to let everyone else be free .
Seems to be working out OK .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you wanted true freedom you shouldn't've used code licensed under the GPL.
The GPL's interpretation of "freedom" is freedom for EVERYONE, not just for YOU.
So while you have free use of the code in question, everyone else has free use of any changes you may make to it.
The idea is that if we leave it up to peoples' good wills to ensure freedom, we'll all live in slavery, so we'll legally force everyone to let everyone else be free.
Seems to be working out OK.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574658</id>
	<title>If you want to be safe</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1269249420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.</p></div><p>
But if you have copyright assignments from all contributors, it's still perfectly safe to use code in a non-GPL program because you own the copyright. FSF demands such "contributor agreements" because it sometimes revises the licensing policy for particular programs.
</p><p>
So here's what you probably meant: If you want to be safe, don't use GPL code written by others in software that you may want to take proprietary. Instead, make sure you either own the copyright or have a fairly permissive license (e.g. BSD, MIT) from the copyright owner.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to be safe , do n't use GPL license for your software , you 're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective .
But if you have copyright assignments from all contributors , it 's still perfectly safe to use code in a non-GPL program because you own the copyright .
FSF demands such " contributor agreements " because it sometimes revises the licensing policy for particular programs .
So here 's what you probably meant : If you want to be safe , do n't use GPL code written by others in software that you may want to take proprietary .
Instead , make sure you either own the copyright or have a fairly permissive license ( e.g .
BSD , MIT ) from the copyright owner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to be safe, don't use GPL license for your software, you're going to have to deal with a bunch of pains in the asses in the future if you ever want to do anything different from a license perspective.
But if you have copyright assignments from all contributors, it's still perfectly safe to use code in a non-GPL program because you own the copyright.
FSF demands such "contributor agreements" because it sometimes revises the licensing policy for particular programs.
So here's what you probably meant: If you want to be safe, don't use GPL code written by others in software that you may want to take proprietary.
Instead, make sure you either own the copyright or have a fairly permissive license (e.g.
BSD, MIT) from the copyright owner.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575258</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>mickwd</author>
	<datestamp>1269251760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.</i></p><p>Tell me about this land that you come from.</p><p>It would appear to be a place without laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Tell me about this land that you come from.It would appear to be a place without laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because your freedom seems to come with restrictions.Tell me about this land that you come from.It would appear to be a place without laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575220</id>
	<title>They've been /.-ed</title>
	<author>fredrik\_haard</author>
	<datestamp>1269251580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mhm? There's an update up on the Nexuiz news page:

"There appears to still be some confusion over this change. I would like to make more things clear:

*Illfonic has obtained the rights to the Nexuiz's engine code, along with a license for the Quake1 engine. The engine has been licensed as non-GPL for Sony Playstation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360, these are very closed platforms and the game had no chance of reaching them under GPL.
*The Nexuiz's engine's prime developer (LordHavoc) is currently working on the Illfonic console version. The Nexuiz codebase will benefit from Illfonic's additions
*IllFonic actively promotes the GPL Nexuiz for all operating systems."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mhm ?
There 's an update up on the Nexuiz news page : " There appears to still be some confusion over this change .
I would like to make more things clear : * Illfonic has obtained the rights to the Nexuiz 's engine code , along with a license for the Quake1 engine .
The engine has been licensed as non-GPL for Sony Playstation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360 , these are very closed platforms and the game had no chance of reaching them under GPL .
* The Nexuiz 's engine 's prime developer ( LordHavoc ) is currently working on the Illfonic console version .
The Nexuiz codebase will benefit from Illfonic 's additions * IllFonic actively promotes the GPL Nexuiz for all operating systems .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mhm?
There's an update up on the Nexuiz news page:

"There appears to still be some confusion over this change.
I would like to make more things clear:

*Illfonic has obtained the rights to the Nexuiz's engine code, along with a license for the Quake1 engine.
The engine has been licensed as non-GPL for Sony Playstation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360, these are very closed platforms and the game had no chance of reaching them under GPL.
*The Nexuiz's engine's prime developer (LordHavoc) is currently working on the Illfonic console version.
The Nexuiz codebase will benefit from Illfonic's additions
*IllFonic actively promotes the GPL Nexuiz for all operating systems.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576470</id>
	<title>What the hell is Nexuiz?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269256800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, would it kill you to spare 5 words to even briefly describe what Nexuiz is? Just a single word ("game") would have put this into context for me without having to follow a single link.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , would it kill you to spare 5 words to even briefly describe what Nexuiz is ?
Just a single word ( " game " ) would have put this into context for me without having to follow a single link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, would it kill you to spare 5 words to even briefly describe what Nexuiz is?
Just a single word ("game") would have put this into context for me without having to follow a single link.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574638</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269249360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they are giving you value: the code of theirs you're using.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they are giving you value : the code of theirs you 're using .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they are giving you value: the code of theirs you're using.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575452</id>
	<title>Re:Welcome to Capitalism</title>
	<author>LordHavoc</author>
	<datestamp>1269252660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very true words, especially with respect to the entertainment industry, and with positive and negative aspects.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very true words , especially with respect to the entertainment industry , and with positive and negative aspects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very true words, especially with respect to the entertainment industry, and with positive and negative aspects.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575514</id>
	<title>Re:What this is:</title>
	<author>Todd Knarr</author>
	<datestamp>1269252960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as the copyrights go, it's simple: unless the original author of a bit of code transferred (or was require to transfer) the copyright to the project, the original author continues to hold the copyright. GPL has nothing to do with it, that's the rules of copyright law. Consensus also has nothing to do with it, it's a decision solely in the hands of the copyright holder whether to transfer their copyright or not. So unless the Nexuiz project required copyright transfer and refused to accept contributions from anyone who wouldn't transfer the copyrights, they don't have the right to license other people's GPL code under non-GPL terms. Even if that code is in the Nexuiz project's codebase.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as the copyrights go , it 's simple : unless the original author of a bit of code transferred ( or was require to transfer ) the copyright to the project , the original author continues to hold the copyright .
GPL has nothing to do with it , that 's the rules of copyright law .
Consensus also has nothing to do with it , it 's a decision solely in the hands of the copyright holder whether to transfer their copyright or not .
So unless the Nexuiz project required copyright transfer and refused to accept contributions from anyone who would n't transfer the copyrights , they do n't have the right to license other people 's GPL code under non-GPL terms .
Even if that code is in the Nexuiz project 's codebase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as the copyrights go, it's simple: unless the original author of a bit of code transferred (or was require to transfer) the copyright to the project, the original author continues to hold the copyright.
GPL has nothing to do with it, that's the rules of copyright law.
Consensus also has nothing to do with it, it's a decision solely in the hands of the copyright holder whether to transfer their copyright or not.
So unless the Nexuiz project required copyright transfer and refused to accept contributions from anyone who wouldn't transfer the copyrights, they don't have the right to license other people's GPL code under non-GPL terms.
Even if that code is in the Nexuiz project's codebase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575528</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1269253020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I imagine version control would help to identify who contributed what piece of code.</p><p>Most version control systems I've used have a 'blame' command (some even have 'praise' as an alias<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) ) that will show you who contributed each line. Every line that isn't by an author who has agreed to the new license means you have work to do - either get the author's approval, or replace the code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine version control would help to identify who contributed what piece of code.Most version control systems I 've used have a 'blame ' command ( some even have 'praise ' as an alias ; - ) ) that will show you who contributed each line .
Every line that is n't by an author who has agreed to the new license means you have work to do - either get the author 's approval , or replace the code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine version control would help to identify who contributed what piece of code.Most version control systems I've used have a 'blame' command (some even have 'praise' as an alias ;-) ) that will show you who contributed each line.
Every line that isn't by an author who has agreed to the new license means you have work to do - either get the author's approval, or replace the code.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575022</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1269250860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All freedom comes with one crucial restriction: you cannot use your freedom to take away someone else's.</p><p>Ironic, isn't it?  But not invalid.</p><p>In the specific case of the GPL, it grants everyone the freedom to copy the modify the software, so long as you do it in such a way that it doesn't take away someone else's right to do the same.  The BSD license however, gives you the ability to copy and modify the software, and the ability to forbid someone else from doing the same thing.  Is that more free or less free?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All freedom comes with one crucial restriction : you can not use your freedom to take away someone else 's.Ironic , is n't it ?
But not invalid.In the specific case of the GPL , it grants everyone the freedom to copy the modify the software , so long as you do it in such a way that it does n't take away someone else 's right to do the same .
The BSD license however , gives you the ability to copy and modify the software , and the ability to forbid someone else from doing the same thing .
Is that more free or less free ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All freedom comes with one crucial restriction: you cannot use your freedom to take away someone else's.Ironic, isn't it?
But not invalid.In the specific case of the GPL, it grants everyone the freedom to copy the modify the software, so long as you do it in such a way that it doesn't take away someone else's right to do the same.
The BSD license however, gives you the ability to copy and modify the software, and the ability to forbid someone else from doing the same thing.
Is that more free or less free?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575980</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1269254820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That would be GPLv3.  The this-is-not-DRM-in-the-sense-of-the-WIPO-treaty clause wasn't present in v2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be GPLv3 .
The this-is-not-DRM-in-the-sense-of-the-WIPO-treaty clause was n't present in v2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That would be GPLv3.
The this-is-not-DRM-in-the-sense-of-the-WIPO-treaty clause wasn't present in v2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575280</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269251820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now"</p><p>After nexuiz release he lost all interest in it, for last 3 years of nexuiz development he doesn't said a single word to developers or community. And now he shows up and sell nexuiz behind everyone's back. So he pushed this game for almost 5 years not 9.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Vermeulen is a hardworking individual , and has push this game ( nexuiz ) for more than 9 years now " After nexuiz release he lost all interest in it , for last 3 years of nexuiz development he does n't said a single word to developers or community .
And now he shows up and sell nexuiz behind everyone 's back .
So he pushed this game for almost 5 years not 9 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Vermeulen is a hardworking individual, and has push this game (nexuiz) for more than 9 years now"After nexuiz release he lost all interest in it, for last 3 years of nexuiz development he doesn't said a single word to developers or community.
And now he shows up and sell nexuiz behind everyone's back.
So he pushed this game for almost 5 years not 9.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268</id>
	<title>Freedom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269291420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The people who contributed their code to Nexuiz under a <i>Freedom</i> license have every right to be pissed if their code is then sold off against their wishes.  If the Nexuiz developers want to do so then stop <b>stealing</b> and re-write what isn't yours.  The GPL isn't a charity to be exploited - it is a philosophy that says cooperation enriches everyone.  If you don't agree with GPL code: DON'T USE IT and write your freaking own.  Leaches.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The people who contributed their code to Nexuiz under a Freedom license have every right to be pissed if their code is then sold off against their wishes .
If the Nexuiz developers want to do so then stop stealing and re-write what is n't yours .
The GPL is n't a charity to be exploited - it is a philosophy that says cooperation enriches everyone .
If you do n't agree with GPL code : DO N'T USE IT and write your freaking own .
Leaches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The people who contributed their code to Nexuiz under a Freedom license have every right to be pissed if their code is then sold off against their wishes.
If the Nexuiz developers want to do so then stop stealing and re-write what isn't yours.
The GPL isn't a charity to be exploited - it is a philosophy that says cooperation enriches everyone.
If you don't agree with GPL code: DON'T USE IT and write your freaking own.
Leaches.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579126</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>hairyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1269275160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is that? You can still go to whatever BSD site they got it from and do whatever the hell you want to it, you just don't get to <strong>force</strong> them to share their changes. That is the only real difference you know: With BSD the author says "do whatever the hell you want with it, if you want to share? Cool. If not, that's okay too" while the GPL says "Sure you can have this <em>but you WILL share</em> or else!"</p><p>

In BOTH cases you get access to the original code, but in the first you may or may not get changes, such as the changes Apple or MSFT has made to any BSD code they are using, whereas with GPL you WILL hand over all the code or get a visit from a lawyer. in either case the question is moot because the bozo in TFA has NO RIGHT to take the code of others and re-license it on ANY terms, period. So whether he went closed or BSD or whatever really don't matter, a thief is a thief.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is that ?
You can still go to whatever BSD site they got it from and do whatever the hell you want to it , you just do n't get to force them to share their changes .
That is the only real difference you know : With BSD the author says " do whatever the hell you want with it , if you want to share ?
Cool. If not , that 's okay too " while the GPL says " Sure you can have this but you WILL share or else !
" In BOTH cases you get access to the original code , but in the first you may or may not get changes , such as the changes Apple or MSFT has made to any BSD code they are using , whereas with GPL you WILL hand over all the code or get a visit from a lawyer .
in either case the question is moot because the bozo in TFA has NO RIGHT to take the code of others and re-license it on ANY terms , period .
So whether he went closed or BSD or whatever really do n't matter , a thief is a thief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is that?
You can still go to whatever BSD site they got it from and do whatever the hell you want to it, you just don't get to force them to share their changes.
That is the only real difference you know: With BSD the author says "do whatever the hell you want with it, if you want to share?
Cool. If not, that's okay too" while the GPL says "Sure you can have this but you WILL share or else!
"

In BOTH cases you get access to the original code, but in the first you may or may not get changes, such as the changes Apple or MSFT has made to any BSD code they are using, whereas with GPL you WILL hand over all the code or get a visit from a lawyer.
in either case the question is moot because the bozo in TFA has NO RIGHT to take the code of others and re-license it on ANY terms, period.
So whether he went closed or BSD or whatever really don't matter, a thief is a thief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575710</id>
	<title>Re:Uninstalled</title>
	<author>dmaz</author>
	<datestamp>1269253680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You really threw a homunculus on the point of the article! The Nexuiz developers, not including the founder, disagreed with this decision just as you do and are now continuing the project under the name Xonotic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You really threw a homunculus on the point of the article !
The Nexuiz developers , not including the founder , disagreed with this decision just as you do and are now continuing the project under the name Xonotic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really threw a homunculus on the point of the article!
The Nexuiz developers, not including the founder, disagreed with this decision just as you do and are now continuing the project under the name Xonotic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574706</id>
	<title>Stop The Presses, whatever that means...</title>
	<author>NEDHead</author>
	<datestamp>1269249600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stifling a yawn, our hero leaned forward, looked him straight in the eye, and uttered the thought that everyone in the room was thinking, "Hmm."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stifling a yawn , our hero leaned forward , looked him straight in the eye , and uttered the thought that everyone in the room was thinking , " Hmm .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stifling a yawn, our hero leaned forward, looked him straight in the eye, and uttered the thought that everyone in the room was thinking, "Hmm.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574656</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1269249420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html" title="gnu.org">Software Freedoms</a> [gnu.org].  If I get a closed-source copy of this binary the freedom to redistribute this derivative source has been violated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Software Freedoms [ gnu.org ] .
If I get a closed-source copy of this binary the freedom to redistribute this derivative source has been violated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software Freedoms [gnu.org].
If I get a closed-source copy of this binary the freedom to redistribute this derivative source has been violated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577442</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1269262080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No they don't unless, as well as distributing it binary-only, they also destroy all traces of the code.  When Microsoft adopted the BSD TCP/IP stack in Windows, the stack did not suddenly vanish.  It continued to be maintained an improved, but Microsoft was stuck with their old version because they didn't participate in this process.  Eventually, they did a complete rewrite.  The only things people couldn't study were Microsoft's changes and, judging by what happened when they tried to migrate Hotmail from FreeBSD to Windows NT, I don't think we missed out on much...</htmltext>
<tokenext>No they do n't unless , as well as distributing it binary-only , they also destroy all traces of the code .
When Microsoft adopted the BSD TCP/IP stack in Windows , the stack did not suddenly vanish .
It continued to be maintained an improved , but Microsoft was stuck with their old version because they did n't participate in this process .
Eventually , they did a complete rewrite .
The only things people could n't study were Microsoft 's changes and , judging by what happened when they tried to migrate Hotmail from FreeBSD to Windows NT , I do n't think we missed out on much.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No they don't unless, as well as distributing it binary-only, they also destroy all traces of the code.
When Microsoft adopted the BSD TCP/IP stack in Windows, the stack did not suddenly vanish.
It continued to be maintained an improved, but Microsoft was stuck with their old version because they didn't participate in this process.
Eventually, they did a complete rewrite.
The only things people couldn't study were Microsoft's changes and, judging by what happened when they tried to migrate Hotmail from FreeBSD to Windows NT, I don't think we missed out on much...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575050</id>
	<title>Re:Some real info:</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1269250980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's definately possible to prove that ALL nonapproved contributor code was removed, but it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult (see the AT&amp;T/BSD legal battle...).  In theory possible, but I think this is going to wind up becoming a very interesting test of the GPL.</p><p>"This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license." - That's a MASSIVE difference, as the Quake source engine was developed as closed source and then later released as GPL - it's easy for iD to prove that all "non-GPL" derivatives were based on a "pre-GPL" code tree.</p><p>Similarly, if LordHavoc had done 2/3) from the get-go, it might be possible.</p><p>However, taking this same approach with a code tree that has been GPLed for close to a decade is going to be a completely different story.</p><p>Also, what's the history regarding licensing of the content (artwork, levels, models, etc)? - These are all clearly "new" developments that have little to no traceability back to the original iD release, since the original content of Quake was NOT covered in the GPL release.  Have all content contributors approved this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's definately possible to prove that ALL nonapproved contributor code was removed , but it 's going to be EXTREMELY difficult ( see the AT&amp;T/BSD legal battle... ) .
In theory possible , but I think this is going to wind up becoming a very interesting test of the GPL .
" This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license .
" - That 's a MASSIVE difference , as the Quake source engine was developed as closed source and then later released as GPL - it 's easy for iD to prove that all " non-GPL " derivatives were based on a " pre-GPL " code tree.Similarly , if LordHavoc had done 2/3 ) from the get-go , it might be possible.However , taking this same approach with a code tree that has been GPLed for close to a decade is going to be a completely different story.Also , what 's the history regarding licensing of the content ( artwork , levels , models , etc ) ?
- These are all clearly " new " developments that have little to no traceability back to the original iD release , since the original content of Quake was NOT covered in the GPL release .
Have all content contributors approved this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's definately possible to prove that ALL nonapproved contributor code was removed, but it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult (see the AT&amp;T/BSD legal battle...).
In theory possible, but I think this is going to wind up becoming a very interesting test of the GPL.
"This why Id Software can release the quake source engine as gpl AND a different license.
" - That's a MASSIVE difference, as the Quake source engine was developed as closed source and then later released as GPL - it's easy for iD to prove that all "non-GPL" derivatives were based on a "pre-GPL" code tree.Similarly, if LordHavoc had done 2/3) from the get-go, it might be possible.However, taking this same approach with a code tree that has been GPLed for close to a decade is going to be a completely different story.Also, what's the history regarding licensing of the content (artwork, levels, models, etc)?
- These are all clearly "new" developments that have little to no traceability back to the original iD release, since the original content of Quake was NOT covered in the GPL release.
Have all content contributors approved this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575890</id>
	<title>Re:You must have an different definition of freedo</title>
	<author>amiga3D</author>
	<datestamp>1269254520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not really.  The only restriction is you can't make him nonfree.  If I give you code and tell you it's free but must remain free...that's the GPL.  If I give you code and tell you you can make it nonfree as long as you credit the people that wrote it...that's BSD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
The only restriction is you ca n't make him nonfree .
If I give you code and tell you it 's free but must remain free...that 's the GPL .
If I give you code and tell you you can make it nonfree as long as you credit the people that wrote it...that 's BSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
The only restriction is you can't make him nonfree.
If I give you code and tell you it's free but must remain free...that's the GPL.
If I give you code and tell you you can make it nonfree as long as you credit the people that wrote it...that's BSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579038</id>
	<title>Open source and capitalism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269274140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One must find a balance between making money from one's skill and improving the world around him. Take for example a client server model. The client is open source but the server is proprietary. Is this evil? Does it depend upon the spirit in which the coder is making his plans? What if the server is declared to also become open source after one year? One could keep the existing business model in tact, while pleasing and contributing to the community from the beginning and even more after one year of profits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One must find a balance between making money from one 's skill and improving the world around him .
Take for example a client server model .
The client is open source but the server is proprietary .
Is this evil ?
Does it depend upon the spirit in which the coder is making his plans ?
What if the server is declared to also become open source after one year ?
One could keep the existing business model in tact , while pleasing and contributing to the community from the beginning and even more after one year of profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One must find a balance between making money from one's skill and improving the world around him.
Take for example a client server model.
The client is open source but the server is proprietary.
Is this evil?
Does it depend upon the spirit in which the coder is making his plans?
What if the server is declared to also become open source after one year?
One could keep the existing business model in tact, while pleasing and contributing to the community from the beginning and even more after one year of profits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574780</id>
	<title>Re:Freedom</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1269249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GPL has an anti-DRM provision which basically says "If you use GPL'd code for DRM, the DMCA doesn't apply to it."  In other words, if DRM is developed under the GPL, said DRM may be legally worked around or bypassed.</p><p>IANAL.  I have no idea if that particular provision actually has any legal force (and if it doesn't then the last sentence of the last paragraph is wrong).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL has an anti-DRM provision which basically says " If you use GPL 'd code for DRM , the DMCA does n't apply to it .
" In other words , if DRM is developed under the GPL , said DRM may be legally worked around or bypassed.IANAL .
I have no idea if that particular provision actually has any legal force ( and if it does n't then the last sentence of the last paragraph is wrong ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL has an anti-DRM provision which basically says "If you use GPL'd code for DRM, the DMCA doesn't apply to it.
"  In other words, if DRM is developed under the GPL, said DRM may be legally worked around or bypassed.IANAL.
I have no idea if that particular provision actually has any legal force (and if it doesn't then the last sentence of the last paragraph is wrong).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575044</id>
	<title>What this is:</title>
	<author>ThoughtMonster</author>
	<datestamp>1269250920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to the FA, the controversy seems to concern two different but interrelated issues:</p><p>Trademark assignment and copyright assignment</p><p>The first is probably more clear cut than the second one. Trademark is controlled by the person(s) it has been assigned to. As long as Mr. Vermuelen holds the trademark to the name Nexuiz, or as long as there is no trademark assigned to anybody for the name Nexuiz, Illfonic is most likely clear on this matter.</p><p>The second, and most controversial issue is that of the relicencing of the Nexuiz/DarkPlaces codebase. Even though, according to the Nexuiz forums, Illfonic seems to have struck a deal with the primary developers of Nexuiz and DarkPlaces, I'm not sure if that would be enough. DarkPlaces is arguably not such a big change over the original GPL'd Quake engine codebase, and even if it was, I'm not really sure if copyright can be reassigned without some kind of consensus amongst most (major) developers. Does each contributor hold the copyright for his work under the GPL or do the contributions end up under a single copyright holder?</p><p>Regardless of the legal issues, this is a really crappy way to treat your community and developers. They have every right to feel betrayed. <a href="http://alientrap.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&amp;t=6079" title="alientrap.org" rel="nofollow">This forum</a> [alientrap.org] thread is a great read, and proves that the community is sane about their demands towards Illfonic, Mr. Vermuelen and LordHavoc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the FA , the controversy seems to concern two different but interrelated issues : Trademark assignment and copyright assignmentThe first is probably more clear cut than the second one .
Trademark is controlled by the person ( s ) it has been assigned to .
As long as Mr. Vermuelen holds the trademark to the name Nexuiz , or as long as there is no trademark assigned to anybody for the name Nexuiz , Illfonic is most likely clear on this matter.The second , and most controversial issue is that of the relicencing of the Nexuiz/DarkPlaces codebase .
Even though , according to the Nexuiz forums , Illfonic seems to have struck a deal with the primary developers of Nexuiz and DarkPlaces , I 'm not sure if that would be enough .
DarkPlaces is arguably not such a big change over the original GPL 'd Quake engine codebase , and even if it was , I 'm not really sure if copyright can be reassigned without some kind of consensus amongst most ( major ) developers .
Does each contributor hold the copyright for his work under the GPL or do the contributions end up under a single copyright holder ? Regardless of the legal issues , this is a really crappy way to treat your community and developers .
They have every right to feel betrayed .
This forum [ alientrap.org ] thread is a great read , and proves that the community is sane about their demands towards Illfonic , Mr. Vermuelen and LordHavoc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the FA, the controversy seems to concern two different but interrelated issues:Trademark assignment and copyright assignmentThe first is probably more clear cut than the second one.
Trademark is controlled by the person(s) it has been assigned to.
As long as Mr. Vermuelen holds the trademark to the name Nexuiz, or as long as there is no trademark assigned to anybody for the name Nexuiz, Illfonic is most likely clear on this matter.The second, and most controversial issue is that of the relicencing of the Nexuiz/DarkPlaces codebase.
Even though, according to the Nexuiz forums, Illfonic seems to have struck a deal with the primary developers of Nexuiz and DarkPlaces, I'm not sure if that would be enough.
DarkPlaces is arguably not such a big change over the original GPL'd Quake engine codebase, and even if it was, I'm not really sure if copyright can be reassigned without some kind of consensus amongst most (major) developers.
Does each contributor hold the copyright for his work under the GPL or do the contributions end up under a single copyright holder?Regardless of the legal issues, this is a really crappy way to treat your community and developers.
They have every right to feel betrayed.
This forum [alientrap.org] thread is a great read, and proves that the community is sane about their demands towards Illfonic, Mr. Vermuelen and LordHavoc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574728
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31583156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_22_1859212_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575710
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575528
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574856
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575030
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574642
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574780
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574618
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574480
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574958
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575578
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574708
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579270
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31581700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31578214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574656
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31574806
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575212
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575192
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575434
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31579126
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31577442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31583156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31576406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_22_1859212.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_22_1859212.31575220
</commentlist>
</conversation>
