<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_30_1559231</id>
	<title>Multi-Touch Tech Firm Seeks iPad Sales Injunction</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1269970020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Taiwan-based Elan Microelectronics just filed a complaint with the US International Trade Commission alleging that Apple is infringing on its patents and violating the Tariff Act, and is seeking a <a href="http://www.enterprisemobiletoday.com/news/article.php/3873586/Multi-touch-Tech-Firms-Seeks-iPad-Sales-Injunction.htm">ban on imports of the iPad</a> as well as an order to stop selling the mobile device along with iPhones, iPods, and Macs. The move was taken as a 'continuation of our efforts to enforce our patent rights against Apple's ongoing infringement,' the company said."</i>  Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already, I suspect it might be a little late.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Taiwan-based Elan Microelectronics just filed a complaint with the US International Trade Commission alleging that Apple is infringing on its patents and violating the Tariff Act , and is seeking a ban on imports of the iPad as well as an order to stop selling the mobile device along with iPhones , iPods , and Macs .
The move was taken as a 'continuation of our efforts to enforce our patent rights against Apple 's ongoing infringement, ' the company said .
" Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking # s already , I suspect it might be a little late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Taiwan-based Elan Microelectronics just filed a complaint with the US International Trade Commission alleging that Apple is infringing on its patents and violating the Tariff Act, and is seeking a ban on imports of the iPad as well as an order to stop selling the mobile device along with iPhones, iPods, and Macs.
The move was taken as a 'continuation of our efforts to enforce our patent rights against Apple's ongoing infringement,' the company said.
"  Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already, I suspect it might be a little late.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677552</id>
	<title>gestures</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1269943380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple's gestures patents that are the issue in the HTC case are incredibly stupid, rivaling Amazon's one-click shopping.  I'd say the patents covered here are also amazingly stupid, but they're more reasonable than Apple's patents simply by virtue of being lower level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's gestures patents that are the issue in the HTC case are incredibly stupid , rivaling Amazon 's one-click shopping .
I 'd say the patents covered here are also amazingly stupid , but they 're more reasonable than Apple 's patents simply by virtue of being lower level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's gestures patents that are the issue in the HTC case are incredibly stupid, rivaling Amazon's one-click shopping.
I'd say the patents covered here are also amazingly stupid, but they're more reasonable than Apple's patents simply by virtue of being lower level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674566</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1269976140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This kind of confusion is what comes of seeing a patent that covers a method of doing something that facilitates X, and calling it "the patent on doing X".  It's not.  There is no such thing as "the patent on multi-touch".</p><p>There can be, and probably are, many patents related to multi-touch.  It's quite possible, since there's more than one way to implement multi-touch, that you could own a patent related to mullti-touch and I could make multi-touch devices without licesning or infringing your patent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This kind of confusion is what comes of seeing a patent that covers a method of doing something that facilitates X , and calling it " the patent on doing X " .
It 's not .
There is no such thing as " the patent on multi-touch " .There can be , and probably are , many patents related to multi-touch .
It 's quite possible , since there 's more than one way to implement multi-touch , that you could own a patent related to mullti-touch and I could make multi-touch devices without licesning or infringing your patent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This kind of confusion is what comes of seeing a patent that covers a method of doing something that facilitates X, and calling it "the patent on doing X".
It's not.
There is no such thing as "the patent on multi-touch".There can be, and probably are, many patents related to multi-touch.
It's quite possible, since there's more than one way to implement multi-touch, that you could own a patent related to mullti-touch and I could make multi-touch devices without licesning or infringing your patent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676492</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1269940200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eh as much as I hate IP bullshit, what precisely would America export if not IP? Food and weapons aren't going to carry us forever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh as much as I hate IP bullshit , what precisely would America export if not IP ?
Food and weapons are n't going to carry us forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh as much as I hate IP bullshit, what precisely would America export if not IP?
Food and weapons aren't going to carry us forever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675402</id>
	<title>I am going to sue everyone!</title>
	<author>Montezumaa</author>
	<datestamp>1269979680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am going to patent the patent system in the US, then sue everyone who has obtained a patent.  Sadly, I am sure the U.S. Patent Office would issue me a patent, then continue to violate my patent.  Of course, I am sure the courts will hear all of my cases, then issue injunctions against everyone.  Shortly after that, someone would divide by zero and reset the entire world.  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am going to patent the patent system in the US , then sue everyone who has obtained a patent .
Sadly , I am sure the U.S. Patent Office would issue me a patent , then continue to violate my patent .
Of course , I am sure the courts will hear all of my cases , then issue injunctions against everyone .
Shortly after that , someone would divide by zero and reset the entire world .
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am going to patent the patent system in the US, then sue everyone who has obtained a patent.
Sadly, I am sure the U.S. Patent Office would issue me a patent, then continue to violate my patent.
Of course, I am sure the courts will hear all of my cases, then issue injunctions against everyone.
Shortly after that, someone would divide by zero and reset the entire world.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944</id>
	<title>Troll Worthy?</title>
	<author>ircmaxell</author>
	<datestamp>1269973920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This depends on if they can prove that negotiations have failed.  If there were little to no negotiations, then this appears to be nothing more than a Troll looking to strike while the iron's hot (or to hurt when the competitor is weakest).  But for all we know, they could have been in negotiations for months/years, which would give them some credibility...  But seriously, the iPhone's been out for what, 3 years?<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/me is starting to get sick of all the trolls...</htmltext>
<tokenext>This depends on if they can prove that negotiations have failed .
If there were little to no negotiations , then this appears to be nothing more than a Troll looking to strike while the iron 's hot ( or to hurt when the competitor is weakest ) .
But for all we know , they could have been in negotiations for months/years , which would give them some credibility... But seriously , the iPhone 's been out for what , 3 years ?
/me is starting to get sick of all the trolls.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This depends on if they can prove that negotiations have failed.
If there were little to no negotiations, then this appears to be nothing more than a Troll looking to strike while the iron's hot (or to hurt when the competitor is weakest).
But for all we know, they could have been in negotiations for months/years, which would give them some credibility...  But seriously, the iPhone's been out for what, 3 years?
/me is starting to get sick of all the trolls...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674058</id>
	<title>ipod?</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1269974280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>or on the ipod complaint..didnt the ipod come out around 7 years ago?</htmltext>
<tokenext>or on the ipod complaint..didnt the ipod come out around 7 years ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or on the ipod complaint..didnt the ipod come out around 7 years ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675374</id>
	<title>Re:did anything come of the last suit?</title>
	<author>C\_Kode</author>
	<datestamp>1269979620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's ongoing.   Which is why with the release of the iPad they are seeking an injunction against the sale of their products.  They aren't suing them again, they are trying to stop the sale of the products to apply more pressure to Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's ongoing .
Which is why with the release of the iPad they are seeking an injunction against the sale of their products .
They are n't suing them again , they are trying to stop the sale of the products to apply more pressure to Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's ongoing.
Which is why with the release of the iPad they are seeking an injunction against the sale of their products.
They aren't suing them again, they are trying to stop the sale of the products to apply more pressure to Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679020</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1269949800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?</p></div><p> <a href="CorrectmeifI'mwrong,butisntApplesuingHTCover,amongotherpatents,multi-touch?" title="slashdot.org">You're wrong.</a> [slashdot.org] The patents Apple is suing HTC over don't deal with multi-touch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but isnt Apple suing HTC over , among other patents , multi-touch ?
You 're wrong .
[ slashdot.org ] The patents Apple is suing HTC over do n't deal with multi-touch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?
You're wrong.
[slashdot.org] The patents Apple is suing HTC over don't deal with multi-touch.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674148</id>
	<title>Re:Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269974580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you don't lose patents just by being slow to enforce them(I think they're already suing in any case).</p><p>It's trademarks you lose if you fail to enforce them.</p><p>copyright patents and trademarks are 3 completely different things even if people like to lump them together under "IP"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you do n't lose patents just by being slow to enforce them ( I think they 're already suing in any case ) .It 's trademarks you lose if you fail to enforce them.copyright patents and trademarks are 3 completely different things even if people like to lump them together under " IP "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you don't lose patents just by being slow to enforce them(I think they're already suing in any case).It's trademarks you lose if you fail to enforce them.copyright patents and trademarks are 3 completely different things even if people like to lump them together under "IP"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673920</id>
	<title>did anything come of the last suit?</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1269973800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/08/AR2009040801229.html" title="washingtonpost.com">sued Apple a year ago</a> [washingtonpost.com] with essentially the same complaint about the iPhone, iPod Touch, and MacBook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They sued Apple a year ago [ washingtonpost.com ] with essentially the same complaint about the iPhone , iPod Touch , and MacBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They sued Apple a year ago [washingtonpost.com] with essentially the same complaint about the iPhone, iPod Touch, and MacBook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674202</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269974760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone, that's the main problem with the patent system. patents are increasingly broad and granted with very little review. thus a patent over a jukebox can be seen to cover mp3 players.<br>the entire system needs to be thrown out. the only way a patent ever makes money is by suing someone who actually makes a product. if the idea was so good in the first place you would have obviously taken it to market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone , that 's the main problem with the patent system .
patents are increasingly broad and granted with very little review .
thus a patent over a jukebox can be seen to cover mp3 players.the entire system needs to be thrown out .
the only way a patent ever makes money is by suing someone who actually makes a product .
if the idea was so good in the first place you would have obviously taken it to market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone, that's the main problem with the patent system.
patents are increasingly broad and granted with very little review.
thus a patent over a jukebox can be seen to cover mp3 players.the entire system needs to be thrown out.
the only way a patent ever makes money is by suing someone who actually makes a product.
if the idea was so good in the first place you would have obviously taken it to market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674946</id>
	<title>Re:How do you say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269977580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Wo mei you yuan" (I don't have money) usually works very well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Wo mei you yuan " ( I do n't have money ) usually works very well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Wo mei you yuan" (I don't have money) usually works very well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674762</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>Colonel Korn</author>
	<datestamp>1269976860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?</p></div><p>Apple's patents aren't stopping you from buying an iPad now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company 's patent expires to buy an iPad ? Apple 's patents are n't stopping you from buying an iPad now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?Apple's patents aren't stopping you from buying an iPad now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674314</id>
	<title>Re:And Macs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269975120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Way to look like an idiot man!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Way to look like an idiot man !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Way to look like an idiot man!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673886</id>
	<title>first post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269973740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Should be good for fags</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should be good for fags</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should be good for fags</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674388</id>
	<title>Pre-orders</title>
	<author>Ziekheid</author>
	<datestamp>1269975420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already.. many iPad pre-orders.. who in their right mind would order, let alone pre-order a- hm nevermind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking # s already.. many iPad pre-orders.. who in their right mind would order , let alone pre-order a- hm nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already.. many iPad pre-orders.. who in their right mind would order, let alone pre-order a- hm nevermind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676096</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269982140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?</p></div><p>I don't know anything about the patent in question, how obvious it is, whether it's software, etc. However, the general answer seems to be: because that "worthless dipshit company" invested time and resources into researching and developing the concept that they had patented, and because Apple used that concept in their device without paying the inventors their fair share.</p><p>- yours, Captain Obvious</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company 's patent expires to buy an iPad ? I do n't know anything about the patent in question , how obvious it is , whether it 's software , etc .
However , the general answer seems to be : because that " worthless dipshit company " invested time and resources into researching and developing the concept that they had patented , and because Apple used that concept in their device without paying the inventors their fair share.- yours , Captain Obvious</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?I don't know anything about the patent in question, how obvious it is, whether it's software, etc.
However, the general answer seems to be: because that "worthless dipshit company" invested time and resources into researching and developing the concept that they had patented, and because Apple used that concept in their device without paying the inventors their fair share.- yours, Captain Obvious
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674390</id>
	<title>How do they get these patents?</title>
	<author>Mark19960</author>
	<datestamp>1269975420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes I know that prior art is not a slam dunk defense but with all of the prior art regarding 'multi-touch' I can't understand how these companies<br>managed to get it patented.<br>It seems that everyone has patented the idea except for the people that had it first!<br>And it appears that it was not Apple, Google, HTC, or even these guys....</p><p>I should patent something random and start to sue people myself, obviously someone is making money doing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes I know that prior art is not a slam dunk defense but with all of the prior art regarding 'multi-touch ' I ca n't understand how these companiesmanaged to get it patented.It seems that everyone has patented the idea except for the people that had it first ! And it appears that it was not Apple , Google , HTC , or even these guys....I should patent something random and start to sue people myself , obviously someone is making money doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes I know that prior art is not a slam dunk defense but with all of the prior art regarding 'multi-touch' I can't understand how these companiesmanaged to get it patented.It seems that everyone has patented the idea except for the people that had it first!And it appears that it was not Apple, Google, HTC, or even these guys....I should patent something random and start to sue people myself, obviously someone is making money doing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679232</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>mgblst</author>
	<datestamp>1269951060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>That doesn't say who owns the patents, but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end.</i></p><p>You have it the wrong way around. Why do you think the US is pushing patent policy ALL AROUND THE WORLD. Because it is all they have, they don't have the manufacturing capacity anymore, the don't have the numbers, all they have is the lead FOR NOW. So they get all the patents on stuff at the beginning, they can keep the money rolling in when these countries start to produce R&amp;D results.</p><p>The same reason they are pushing all IP, copyrights as well, with huge extensions.</p><p>I am surprised this obvious tactic seems to elude so many people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That does n't say who owns the patents , but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it 's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end.You have it the wrong way around .
Why do you think the US is pushing patent policy ALL AROUND THE WORLD .
Because it is all they have , they do n't have the manufacturing capacity anymore , the do n't have the numbers , all they have is the lead FOR NOW .
So they get all the patents on stuff at the beginning , they can keep the money rolling in when these countries start to produce R&amp;D results.The same reason they are pushing all IP , copyrights as well , with huge extensions.I am surprised this obvious tactic seems to elude so many people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That doesn't say who owns the patents, but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end.You have it the wrong way around.
Why do you think the US is pushing patent policy ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
Because it is all they have, they don't have the manufacturing capacity anymore, the don't have the numbers, all they have is the lead FOR NOW.
So they get all the patents on stuff at the beginning, they can keep the money rolling in when these countries start to produce R&amp;D results.The same reason they are pushing all IP, copyrights as well, with huge extensions.I am surprised this obvious tactic seems to elude so many people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676130</id>
	<title>Patent Trolls should maintain their patents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269982260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently the patent in question, 5,825,352, has <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2006/week51/patexpi.htm" title="uspto.gov">expired due to failure to pay maintenance fees</a> [uspto.gov] as of Oct 20, 2006.</p><p>So if the patent is expired, what basis are they suing on?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently the patent in question , 5,825,352 , has expired due to failure to pay maintenance fees [ uspto.gov ] as of Oct 20 , 2006.So if the patent is expired , what basis are they suing on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently the patent in question, 5,825,352, has expired due to failure to pay maintenance fees [uspto.gov] as of Oct 20, 2006.So if the patent is expired, what basis are they suing on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675150</id>
	<title>This just in :o</title>
	<author>viamptor</author>
	<datestamp>1269978660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Elan Micro Electronics just issued a press release

We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it.

We&rsquo;ve decided to do something about it,&rdquo; said Mr I. H. Yeh, ELAN MICRO ELECTRONICS CEO.

&ldquo;We think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours.&rdquo;</htmltext>
<tokenext>Elan Micro Electronics just issued a press release We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions , or we can do something about it .
We    ve decided to do something about it ,    said Mr I. H. Yeh , ELAN MICRO ELECTRONICS CEO .
   We think competition is healthy , but competitors should create their own original technology , not steal ours.   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Elan Micro Electronics just issued a press release

We can sit by and watch competitors steal our patented inventions, or we can do something about it.
We’ve decided to do something about it,” said Mr I. H. Yeh, ELAN MICRO ELECTRONICS CEO.
“We think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours.”</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674474</id>
	<title>Re:ipod?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269975720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Multi-touch ipods didn't, dumbass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Multi-touch ipods did n't , dumbass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Multi-touch ipods didn't, dumbass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674058</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898</id>
	<title>How do you say</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269973740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>'Don't touch me there' in Chinese?</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Do n't touch me there ' in Chinese ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Don't touch me there' in Chinese?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673996</id>
	<title>Re:How do you say</title>
	<author>knappe duivel</author>
	<datestamp>1269974100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'Don't multi-touch me there' in Chinese?</p></div><p>fixed that for you</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Do n't multi-touch me there ' in Chinese ? fixed that for you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Don't multi-touch me there' in Chinese?fixed that for you
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675830</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1269981180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?</i></p><p>Because that worthless dipshit company may have spent years and millions of dollars developing that technology, and the US was held, as a principle for a very long time, that such investments should be rewarded by a temporary monopoly so that one can benefit from those efforts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company 's patent expires to buy an iPad ? Because that worthless dipshit company may have spent years and millions of dollars developing that technology , and the US was held , as a principle for a very long time , that such investments should be rewarded by a temporary monopoly so that one can benefit from those efforts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?Because that worthless dipshit company may have spent years and millions of dollars developing that technology, and the US was held, as a principle for a very long time, that such investments should be rewarded by a temporary monopoly so that one can benefit from those efforts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576</id>
	<title>Ugh</title>
	<author>mosb1000</author>
	<datestamp>1269976140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why I don't want to take out patents for my invention.  They don't seem to actually protect you from litigation, and they hinder the development and deployment of new technologies.  Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?  Why should there be a million lawyers involved in developing new technology (about the only people worse for technology than politicians are lawyers).  Patents are a terrible idea.  All the most successful technology companies simply ignore them (in a practical sense) and leave the issue for their lawyers to deal with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I do n't want to take out patents for my invention .
They do n't seem to actually protect you from litigation , and they hinder the development and deployment of new technologies .
Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company 's patent expires to buy an iPad ?
Why should there be a million lawyers involved in developing new technology ( about the only people worse for technology than politicians are lawyers ) .
Patents are a terrible idea .
All the most successful technology companies simply ignore them ( in a practical sense ) and leave the issue for their lawyers to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I don't want to take out patents for my invention.
They don't seem to actually protect you from litigation, and they hinder the development and deployment of new technologies.
Why should I have to wait until some worthless dipshit company's patent expires to buy an iPad?
Why should there be a million lawyers involved in developing new technology (about the only people worse for technology than politicians are lawyers).
Patents are a terrible idea.
All the most successful technology companies simply ignore them (in a practical sense) and leave the issue for their lawyers to deal with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986</id>
	<title>Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1269974040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not saying Elan Microelectronics doesn't have a patent, however didn't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not saying Elan Microelectronics does n't have a patent , however did n't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not saying Elan Microelectronics doesn't have a patent, however didn't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675310</id>
	<title>Re:Troll Worthy?</title>
	<author>rivertripper</author>
	<datestamp>1269979380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Elan sued Synaptic in 2006, before the iPhone was launched. In 2008 they won and Synaptic licensed Elan's multi-touch technology.  I suppose they wanted to win their patent suit before going after Apple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Elan sued Synaptic in 2006 , before the iPhone was launched .
In 2008 they won and Synaptic licensed Elan 's multi-touch technology .
I suppose they wanted to win their patent suit before going after Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Elan sued Synaptic in 2006, before the iPhone was launched.
In 2008 they won and Synaptic licensed Elan's multi-touch technology.
I suppose they wanted to win their patent suit before going after Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674660</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1269976440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i>this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end</i>"</p><p>So... the argument against an IP framework is that those dern ferners might benefit from it too when they're the ones doing the innovative work?  That soudns a bit nationalistic to say the least...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it 's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end " So... the argument against an IP framework is that those dern ferners might benefit from it too when they 're the ones doing the innovative work ?
That soudns a bit nationalistic to say the least.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end"So... the argument against an IP framework is that those dern ferners might benefit from it too when they're the ones doing the innovative work?
That soudns a bit nationalistic to say the least...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675464</id>
	<title>I don't think they'll win, on iPhone/iPad.</title>
	<author>DdJ</author>
	<datestamp>1269979860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Bit misleading IMO to talk about this in terms of a "multi-touch tech" company using "their" patents.  The patent in question was granted in 1998... to <em>Logitech</em> (it was applied-for in 1996).  The patent has changed hands since then.  This company didn't acquire the patents in question until something like 2008.</p><p>2) Having read the patent, I don't think the iPhone and iPad infringe.  Go read the actual text.  Looks to me like it actually relates to touchpads attached to computers, used in an environment that was built around the mouse, and how to use multitouch gestures to improve trackpad functionality.  So, yeah, if the patent is legit and all, I absolutely think the MacBook that lets you scroll with two fingers (emulating a mouse wheel) would infringe.  But I don't think the iPhone or iPad (which were not designed around mice and don't really have a concept of a cursor as such) necessarily infringe.</p><p>Of course, IANAL, so nobody should trust me.  Go read it yourself!  Especially if you're a lawyer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Bit misleading IMO to talk about this in terms of a " multi-touch tech " company using " their " patents .
The patent in question was granted in 1998... to Logitech ( it was applied-for in 1996 ) .
The patent has changed hands since then .
This company did n't acquire the patents in question until something like 2008.2 ) Having read the patent , I do n't think the iPhone and iPad infringe .
Go read the actual text .
Looks to me like it actually relates to touchpads attached to computers , used in an environment that was built around the mouse , and how to use multitouch gestures to improve trackpad functionality .
So , yeah , if the patent is legit and all , I absolutely think the MacBook that lets you scroll with two fingers ( emulating a mouse wheel ) would infringe .
But I do n't think the iPhone or iPad ( which were not designed around mice and do n't really have a concept of a cursor as such ) necessarily infringe.Of course , IANAL , so nobody should trust me .
Go read it yourself !
Especially if you 're a lawyer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Bit misleading IMO to talk about this in terms of a "multi-touch tech" company using "their" patents.
The patent in question was granted in 1998... to Logitech (it was applied-for in 1996).
The patent has changed hands since then.
This company didn't acquire the patents in question until something like 2008.2) Having read the patent, I don't think the iPhone and iPad infringe.
Go read the actual text.
Looks to me like it actually relates to touchpads attached to computers, used in an environment that was built around the mouse, and how to use multitouch gestures to improve trackpad functionality.
So, yeah, if the patent is legit and all, I absolutely think the MacBook that lets you scroll with two fingers (emulating a mouse wheel) would infringe.
But I don't think the iPhone or iPad (which were not designed around mice and don't really have a concept of a cursor as such) necessarily infringe.Of course, IANAL, so nobody should trust me.
Go read it yourself!
Especially if you're a lawyer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674274</id>
	<title>Re:And Macs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269975000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm, the apple store. I believe all MacBooks now have multi-touch trackpads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm , the apple store .
I believe all MacBooks now have multi-touch trackpads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm, the apple store.
I believe all MacBooks now have multi-touch trackpads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676616</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>John Whitley</author>
	<datestamp>1269940560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it's patents and technology.</p></div><p>There's actually almost zero guessing on this point, although it takes some digging to find all of the facts.  Much of the details were posted on the <a href="http://fingerfans.dreamhosters.com/forum/" title="dreamhosters.com">Fingerfans</a> [dreamhosters.com] forum back when the purchase happened.  Other useful info may exist primarily in the Internet Archive at this point.</p><p>Synopsis: Fingerworks as a company was a young venture founded based on Wayne Westerman's Ph.D. work relating to capacitive multi-touch interfaces.  Fingerworks was one of the first companies to have useful (awesome, actually) multitouch based products on the open market.  These included the GesturePad, a multi-touch pointing device not dissimilar to the recent Wacom Bamboo Touch; and the TouchStream multi-touch keyboard.  The TouchStream was pretty cool: max typing speeds were slower than a conventional keyboard, but the whole surface was usable for multitouch pointer input and gestures.</p><p>Apple apparently liked what they saw and bought the company up -- its patent portfolio as well as Westerman and their core R&amp;D team.  <em>This was not even remotely public knowledge at the time.</em>  To outsiders' view, Fingerworks practically vanished.  The release of the first iPhone was the coming-out party for this technology at Apple.  Westerman and his team have continued to do multi-touch research at Apple, issuing a variety of patents under the auspices of their new company.  I recall a few of those being mentioned on Slashdot in the past, specifically one about ongoing work to improve haptics (touch feedback) for multi-touch keyboards.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it 's patents and technology.There 's actually almost zero guessing on this point , although it takes some digging to find all of the facts .
Much of the details were posted on the Fingerfans [ dreamhosters.com ] forum back when the purchase happened .
Other useful info may exist primarily in the Internet Archive at this point.Synopsis : Fingerworks as a company was a young venture founded based on Wayne Westerman 's Ph.D. work relating to capacitive multi-touch interfaces .
Fingerworks was one of the first companies to have useful ( awesome , actually ) multitouch based products on the open market .
These included the GesturePad , a multi-touch pointing device not dissimilar to the recent Wacom Bamboo Touch ; and the TouchStream multi-touch keyboard .
The TouchStream was pretty cool : max typing speeds were slower than a conventional keyboard , but the whole surface was usable for multitouch pointer input and gestures.Apple apparently liked what they saw and bought the company up -- its patent portfolio as well as Westerman and their core R&amp;D team .
This was not even remotely public knowledge at the time .
To outsiders ' view , Fingerworks practically vanished .
The release of the first iPhone was the coming-out party for this technology at Apple .
Westerman and his team have continued to do multi-touch research at Apple , issuing a variety of patents under the auspices of their new company .
I recall a few of those being mentioned on Slashdot in the past , specifically one about ongoing work to improve haptics ( touch feedback ) for multi-touch keyboards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it's patents and technology.There's actually almost zero guessing on this point, although it takes some digging to find all of the facts.
Much of the details were posted on the Fingerfans [dreamhosters.com] forum back when the purchase happened.
Other useful info may exist primarily in the Internet Archive at this point.Synopsis: Fingerworks as a company was a young venture founded based on Wayne Westerman's Ph.D. work relating to capacitive multi-touch interfaces.
Fingerworks was one of the first companies to have useful (awesome, actually) multitouch based products on the open market.
These included the GesturePad, a multi-touch pointing device not dissimilar to the recent Wacom Bamboo Touch; and the TouchStream multi-touch keyboard.
The TouchStream was pretty cool: max typing speeds were slower than a conventional keyboard, but the whole surface was usable for multitouch pointer input and gestures.Apple apparently liked what they saw and bought the company up -- its patent portfolio as well as Westerman and their core R&amp;D team.
This was not even remotely public knowledge at the time.
To outsiders' view, Fingerworks practically vanished.
The release of the first iPhone was the coming-out party for this technology at Apple.
Westerman and his team have continued to do multi-touch research at Apple, issuing a variety of patents under the auspices of their new company.
I recall a few of those being mentioned on Slashdot in the past, specifically one about ongoing work to improve haptics (touch feedback) for multi-touch keyboards.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31700800</id>
	<title>Re:Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1270140780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know the legal team running this lawsuit at Elan against Apple. Let's just say that: 1) they did legitimately invent technology before Apple/Fingerworks, 2) there was IP theft with employees and such, and 3) it's really hard to sue Apple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know the legal team running this lawsuit at Elan against Apple .
Let 's just say that : 1 ) they did legitimately invent technology before Apple/Fingerworks , 2 ) there was IP theft with employees and such , and 3 ) it 's really hard to sue Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know the legal team running this lawsuit at Elan against Apple.
Let's just say that: 1) they did legitimately invent technology before Apple/Fingerworks, 2) there was IP theft with employees and such, and 3) it's really hard to sue Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674192</id>
	<title>HTC buying this company</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269974760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one who is seeing HTC buying this company?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who is seeing HTC buying this company ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who is seeing HTC buying this company?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</id>
	<title>Wait...</title>
	<author>AequitasVeritas</author>
	<datestamp>1269973860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?  Now Apple is being sued over the same thing?<br> <br>So who actually owns this patent?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but isnt Apple suing HTC over , among other patents , multi-touch ?
Now Apple is being sued over the same thing ?
So who actually owns this patent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?
Now Apple is being sued over the same thing?
So who actually owns this patent?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675752</id>
	<title>Re:Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Zordak</author>
	<datestamp>1269980940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Short answer:  No.  The statute of limitations on patent infringement is six years.  And in the case of ongoing infringement, even if you miss the six year mark from when infringement started, you can still get damages back to six years from when you filed your law suit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Short answer : No .
The statute of limitations on patent infringement is six years .
And in the case of ongoing infringement , even if you miss the six year mark from when infringement started , you can still get damages back to six years from when you filed your law suit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Short answer:  No.
The statute of limitations on patent infringement is six years.
And in the case of ongoing infringement, even if you miss the six year mark from when infringement started, you can still get damages back to six years from when you filed your law suit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674844</id>
	<title>Elantech has actual products.</title>
	<author>krzy123</author>
	<datestamp>1269977100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Elantech makes the multi-touch trackpads in the eeePC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Elantech makes the multi-touch trackpads in the eeePC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Elantech makes the multi-touch trackpads in the eeePC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31682036</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269964500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd venture Apple holds the earliest  patents, or at least connected to the earliest research. Although the taiwaneese companies may have picked up some simple "multitouch" to make touch pads, Apple picked up Fingerworks which had products for 5 years and research and patents years before that....  at least the mid-1990's and Apple is barely scraping the surface of what the Fingerworks patents cover.</p><p>So many of the patents overlap... the "touchpad" makers were getting patents for adding "one more finger or gesture" and the whole time somebody like fingerworks has patents for full surface 5 finger detection (excluding palms and stray touches) with gestures since the late 1990's the main problem with Fingerworks is that their devices were simply too expensive to make at the time with limited resources. Even iPad doesn't do everything the old Fingerworks boards can do with multitouch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd venture Apple holds the earliest patents , or at least connected to the earliest research .
Although the taiwaneese companies may have picked up some simple " multitouch " to make touch pads , Apple picked up Fingerworks which had products for 5 years and research and patents years before that.... at least the mid-1990 's and Apple is barely scraping the surface of what the Fingerworks patents cover.So many of the patents overlap... the " touchpad " makers were getting patents for adding " one more finger or gesture " and the whole time somebody like fingerworks has patents for full surface 5 finger detection ( excluding palms and stray touches ) with gestures since the late 1990 's the main problem with Fingerworks is that their devices were simply too expensive to make at the time with limited resources .
Even iPad does n't do everything the old Fingerworks boards can do with multitouch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd venture Apple holds the earliest  patents, or at least connected to the earliest research.
Although the taiwaneese companies may have picked up some simple "multitouch" to make touch pads, Apple picked up Fingerworks which had products for 5 years and research and patents years before that....  at least the mid-1990's and Apple is barely scraping the surface of what the Fingerworks patents cover.So many of the patents overlap... the "touchpad" makers were getting patents for adding "one more finger or gesture" and the whole time somebody like fingerworks has patents for full surface 5 finger detection (excluding palms and stray touches) with gestures since the late 1990's the main problem with Fingerworks is that their devices were simply too expensive to make at the time with limited resources.
Even iPad doesn't do everything the old Fingerworks boards can do with multitouch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674106</id>
	<title>If their customs works like ours</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1269974400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already, I suspect it might be a little late.</p></div><p>If their customs process works like the one in the U.S., they'll just throw all the iPads in a locked room, tell the would be recipients that they are just out the money and that they owe them for the costs of storage, destruction, and disposal and that furthermore, they may feel free to FOAD.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking # s already , I suspect it might be a little late.If their customs process works like the one in the U.S. , they 'll just throw all the iPads in a locked room , tell the would be recipients that they are just out the money and that they owe them for the costs of storage , destruction , and disposal and that furthermore , they may feel free to FOAD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering many iPad pre-orders have tracking #s already, I suspect it might be a little late.If their customs process works like the one in the U.S., they'll just throw all the iPads in a locked room, tell the would be recipients that they are just out the money and that they owe them for the costs of storage, destruction, and disposal and that furthermore, they may feel free to FOAD.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31678926</id>
	<title>Hope apple has to pay (more) licenses.</title>
	<author>Exter-C</author>
	<datestamp>1269949380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope that apple will lose this battle if only to force them to pay license fee's for tech. They so often expect to walk over people due to their size and the little guys tend to loose thanks to a heavily bias legal system which requires large sums of money to fight your corner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope that apple will lose this battle if only to force them to pay license fee 's for tech .
They so often expect to walk over people due to their size and the little guys tend to loose thanks to a heavily bias legal system which requires large sums of money to fight your corner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope that apple will lose this battle if only to force them to pay license fee's for tech.
They so often expect to walk over people due to their size and the little guys tend to loose thanks to a heavily bias legal system which requires large sums of money to fight your corner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674296</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>msauve</author>
	<datestamp>1269975060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe that Apple is suing HTC over <i>gestures</i> which use multi-touch.<br> <br>The patent in this suit is related to <i>sensing</i> multi-touch, and is therefore a prerequisite to doing multi-touch gestures. <a href="http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=IAkYAAAAEBAJ&amp;dq=5825352" title="google.com">Here's the patent</a> [google.com].<br> <br>I have no idea of what relationship there is between Elan and Logitech (who was awarded the patent).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe that Apple is suing HTC over gestures which use multi-touch .
The patent in this suit is related to sensing multi-touch , and is therefore a prerequisite to doing multi-touch gestures .
Here 's the patent [ google.com ] .
I have no idea of what relationship there is between Elan and Logitech ( who was awarded the patent ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe that Apple is suing HTC over gestures which use multi-touch.
The patent in this suit is related to sensing multi-touch, and is therefore a prerequisite to doing multi-touch gestures.
Here's the patent [google.com].
I have no idea of what relationship there is between Elan and Logitech (who was awarded the patent).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31698958</id>
	<title>Re:Troll Worthy?</title>
	<author>LordVader717</author>
	<datestamp>1270123500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Elan make products of their own and therefore can't be described as patent trolls. Patents are also rarely used immediately after a product is released.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Elan make products of their own and therefore ca n't be described as patent trolls .
Patents are also rarely used immediately after a product is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Elan make products of their own and therefore can't be described as patent trolls.
Patents are also rarely used immediately after a product is released.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673956</id>
	<title>Apple being sued for stealing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269973920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What else is new?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What else is new ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What else is new?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098</id>
	<title>And Macs?</title>
	<author>Akido37</author>
	<datestamp>1269974400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where are these multi-touch Macs, and where can I buy one?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where are these multi-touch Macs , and where can I buy one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where are these multi-touch Macs, and where can I buy one?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31683354</id>
	<title>Re:How do they get these patents?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269974580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's because they didn't patent multitouch. Their patents cover different technologies implementing multitouch. For example Apple with their capacity sensors patent witch they brought from FingerWorks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because they did n't patent multitouch .
Their patents cover different technologies implementing multitouch .
For example Apple with their capacity sensors patent witch they brought from FingerWorks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because they didn't patent multitouch.
Their patents cover different technologies implementing multitouch.
For example Apple with their capacity sensors patent witch they brought from FingerWorks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674164</id>
	<title>Re:Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Mindcontrolled</author>
	<datestamp>1269974640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You don't actually lose your patent rights when not going after an infringement or a patent initially. The actual consequences depend on the jurisdiction. In most of Europe, for example, you would severely compromise your position in subsequent litigation, though. Especially if the opposite site can raise doubts whether you acted in good faith, e.g. you didn't know about the infringement, or out of malice, to make more cash by trollish litigation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't actually lose your patent rights when not going after an infringement or a patent initially .
The actual consequences depend on the jurisdiction .
In most of Europe , for example , you would severely compromise your position in subsequent litigation , though .
Especially if the opposite site can raise doubts whether you acted in good faith , e.g .
you did n't know about the infringement , or out of malice , to make more cash by trollish litigation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't actually lose your patent rights when not going after an infringement or a patent initially.
The actual consequences depend on the jurisdiction.
In most of Europe, for example, you would severely compromise your position in subsequent litigation, though.
Especially if the opposite site can raise doubts whether you acted in good faith, e.g.
you didn't know about the infringement, or out of malice, to make more cash by trollish litigation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269975480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple bought fingerworks in 2005.  They have their implementation of multitouch.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FingerWorks" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FingerWorks</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>That doesn't say who owns the patents, but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple bought fingerworks in 2005 .
They have their implementation of multitouch.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FingerWorks [ wikipedia.org ] That does n't say who owns the patents , but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it 's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple bought fingerworks in 2005.
They have their implementation of multitouch.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FingerWorks [wikipedia.org]That doesn't say who owns the patents, but this shows how stupid America pushing IP is... it's just going to bite us back bigtime when India/China compete on the high end.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31678226</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1269946380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's nothing wrong with nationalism.</p><p>My family, my kind, my countrymen... as for you?  Out of sight, out of mind.  I make laws to handle disputes among me and my countrymen, not you.  I make laws in my own interest, not yours.  My laws apply to me, by me, for me, as follows so do the Rights I have on account of those laws; if you want something similar, write up your own laws.  My currency better have recognizable faces, those faces must be iconic to some fundamental aspect of my being or allegiance; a founding father of my own country is very fundamental, neutral and allows for social dynamics.  You have your own founding fathers; my money is for my country.  My country, given the variables, has developed it's own cultures and beliefs, practices, patterns of behavior and propensities.  Those propensities and the like, govern severity of consequences, if there shall be consequences for any given act we deem to be illegal. Punishment must be relative to general lifestyles; so don't make a fuss about public executions in Saudi Arabia while a Saudi would be appalled by your ridiculous crime rates.  When in Rome, so when you get here, leave your opinions, beliefs and preconceptions at the border because you're nothing but a tourist, a guest holding a hall pass, a permission slip, a perishable visa.  A vagabond of sorts, a long ways from home.  It's best to be on your best behavior, till you return home, anything good for you depends on our willful hospitality.</p><p>Nationalism is self identity.  Nationalism is self dignity.  Nationalism is self respect.  Nationalism is self pride.  Nationalism is brotherhood.  Nationalism is family scaled to society.</p><p>There's nothing wrong with Nationalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing wrong with nationalism.My family , my kind , my countrymen... as for you ?
Out of sight , out of mind .
I make laws to handle disputes among me and my countrymen , not you .
I make laws in my own interest , not yours .
My laws apply to me , by me , for me , as follows so do the Rights I have on account of those laws ; if you want something similar , write up your own laws .
My currency better have recognizable faces , those faces must be iconic to some fundamental aspect of my being or allegiance ; a founding father of my own country is very fundamental , neutral and allows for social dynamics .
You have your own founding fathers ; my money is for my country .
My country , given the variables , has developed it 's own cultures and beliefs , practices , patterns of behavior and propensities .
Those propensities and the like , govern severity of consequences , if there shall be consequences for any given act we deem to be illegal .
Punishment must be relative to general lifestyles ; so do n't make a fuss about public executions in Saudi Arabia while a Saudi would be appalled by your ridiculous crime rates .
When in Rome , so when you get here , leave your opinions , beliefs and preconceptions at the border because you 're nothing but a tourist , a guest holding a hall pass , a permission slip , a perishable visa .
A vagabond of sorts , a long ways from home .
It 's best to be on your best behavior , till you return home , anything good for you depends on our willful hospitality.Nationalism is self identity .
Nationalism is self dignity .
Nationalism is self respect .
Nationalism is self pride .
Nationalism is brotherhood .
Nationalism is family scaled to society.There 's nothing wrong with Nationalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing wrong with nationalism.My family, my kind, my countrymen... as for you?
Out of sight, out of mind.
I make laws to handle disputes among me and my countrymen, not you.
I make laws in my own interest, not yours.
My laws apply to me, by me, for me, as follows so do the Rights I have on account of those laws; if you want something similar, write up your own laws.
My currency better have recognizable faces, those faces must be iconic to some fundamental aspect of my being or allegiance; a founding father of my own country is very fundamental, neutral and allows for social dynamics.
You have your own founding fathers; my money is for my country.
My country, given the variables, has developed it's own cultures and beliefs, practices, patterns of behavior and propensities.
Those propensities and the like, govern severity of consequences, if there shall be consequences for any given act we deem to be illegal.
Punishment must be relative to general lifestyles; so don't make a fuss about public executions in Saudi Arabia while a Saudi would be appalled by your ridiculous crime rates.
When in Rome, so when you get here, leave your opinions, beliefs and preconceptions at the border because you're nothing but a tourist, a guest holding a hall pass, a permission slip, a perishable visa.
A vagabond of sorts, a long ways from home.
It's best to be on your best behavior, till you return home, anything good for you depends on our willful hospitality.Nationalism is self identity.
Nationalism is self dignity.
Nationalism is self respect.
Nationalism is self pride.
Nationalism is brotherhood.
Nationalism is family scaled to society.There's nothing wrong with Nationalism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674952</id>
	<title>History of Multi-Touch</title>
	<author>rivertripper</author>
	<datestamp>1269977640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been following this story since April of 2009. This link <a href="http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html" title="billbuxton.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html</a> [billbuxton.com] is the best explanation of how multi-touch technology was created.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been following this story since April of 2009 .
This link http : //www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html [ billbuxton.com ] is the best explanation of how multi-touch technology was created .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been following this story since April of 2009.
This link http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html [billbuxton.com] is the best explanation of how multi-touch technology was created.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677182</id>
	<title>Ok, you are wrong - no multitouch patents in suit</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1269942240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?</i></p><p>Actually, none of the patents involved in that suit relate to multi-touch.  They are other older, generally more obscure things... possibly even a few "real" patents as opposed to just software patents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but isnt Apple suing HTC over , among other patents , multi-touch ? Actually , none of the patents involved in that suit relate to multi-touch .
They are other older , generally more obscure things... possibly even a few " real " patents as opposed to just software patents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Apple suing HTC over, among other patents, multi-touch?Actually, none of the patents involved in that suit relate to multi-touch.
They are other older, generally more obscure things... possibly even a few "real" patents as opposed to just software patents.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674270</id>
	<title>Re:Wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269975000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's tricky and unless you know more details about the specific case, it's hard to say who actually owns what.  This is what I know from the case:
</p><p>
Apple bought a company called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FingerWorks" title="wikipedia.org">Fingerworks</a> [wikipedia.org] in 2005.  Fingeworks made multi-touch keyboard and mice.  Shortly after bought by Apple, Fingerworks ceased to sell or make any products.  The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it's patents and technology.  As of August 2008, Fingerworks continued to file patents.</p><p>Apple releases the iPhone in 2007.  Elan Microelectronics sues them thereafter. </p><p>When looking at these patent cases, there has to be certainty about the specific technology involved.  Multi-touch is large collection of differing technologies.  MS Surface for example relies on cameras whereas the iPhone appears to use capacitance.  The devil is in the details and that's what lawyers are for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's tricky and unless you know more details about the specific case , it 's hard to say who actually owns what .
This is what I know from the case : Apple bought a company called Fingerworks [ wikipedia.org ] in 2005 .
Fingeworks made multi-touch keyboard and mice .
Shortly after bought by Apple , Fingerworks ceased to sell or make any products .
The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it 's patents and technology .
As of August 2008 , Fingerworks continued to file patents.Apple releases the iPhone in 2007 .
Elan Microelectronics sues them thereafter .
When looking at these patent cases , there has to be certainty about the specific technology involved .
Multi-touch is large collection of differing technologies .
MS Surface for example relies on cameras whereas the iPhone appears to use capacitance .
The devil is in the details and that 's what lawyers are for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's tricky and unless you know more details about the specific case, it's hard to say who actually owns what.
This is what I know from the case:

Apple bought a company called Fingerworks [wikipedia.org] in 2005.
Fingeworks made multi-touch keyboard and mice.
Shortly after bought by Apple, Fingerworks ceased to sell or make any products.
The best guess is that Apple bought Fingerworks solely for it's patents and technology.
As of August 2008, Fingerworks continued to file patents.Apple releases the iPhone in 2007.
Elan Microelectronics sues them thereafter.
When looking at these patent cases, there has to be certainty about the specific technology involved.
Multi-touch is large collection of differing technologies.
MS Surface for example relies on cameras whereas the iPhone appears to use capacitance.
The devil is in the details and that's what lawyers are for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675674</id>
	<title>Know writing capability</title>
	<author>jweller13</author>
	<datestamp>1269980700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't really follow Apple closely so I was surprised to find out that the ipad doesn't have screen writing capability?  I'd assumed it did since tablet PCs have that capability.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really follow Apple closely so I was surprised to find out that the ipad does n't have screen writing capability ?
I 'd assumed it did since tablet PCs have that capability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really follow Apple closely so I was surprised to find out that the ipad doesn't have screen writing capability?
I'd assumed it did since tablet PCs have that capability.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446</id>
	<title>Re:Patent Trolls</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1269975660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>didn't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago?</p></div><p>You mean when they began patent negotiations, and finally sued for patent infringement a year ago? You can't sue for patent infringement until someone actually infringes on your patent.  Two years is not a long time when it comes to doing research and preparing for a patent infringement lawsuit, and it was Apple who requested the trial be delayed so they could prepare.  You might have a point if they had waited five or ten years, but at this point <i>any</i> patent infringement lawsuit against the iPhone is still within a reasonable time-frame.  It is Apple who is delaying and stalling and generally being a douchebag toward the rest of the cell phone industry here.</p><p>This is Elan Microelectronics basically saying Apple should not be permitted to release a new potentially infringing product while they have litigation in progress that directly concerns the type product they are releasing.</p><p>I think their position is completely reasonable, but I'll admit I might think differently if I were an Apple fan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>did n't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago ? You mean when they began patent negotiations , and finally sued for patent infringement a year ago ?
You ca n't sue for patent infringement until someone actually infringes on your patent .
Two years is not a long time when it comes to doing research and preparing for a patent infringement lawsuit , and it was Apple who requested the trial be delayed so they could prepare .
You might have a point if they had waited five or ten years , but at this point any patent infringement lawsuit against the iPhone is still within a reasonable time-frame .
It is Apple who is delaying and stalling and generally being a douchebag toward the rest of the cell phone industry here.This is Elan Microelectronics basically saying Apple should not be permitted to release a new potentially infringing product while they have litigation in progress that directly concerns the type product they are releasing.I think their position is completely reasonable , but I 'll admit I might think differently if I were an Apple fan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>didn't they kinda give up their rights when they stayed silent when the iPhone launched three years ago?You mean when they began patent negotiations, and finally sued for patent infringement a year ago?
You can't sue for patent infringement until someone actually infringes on your patent.
Two years is not a long time when it comes to doing research and preparing for a patent infringement lawsuit, and it was Apple who requested the trial be delayed so they could prepare.
You might have a point if they had waited five or ten years, but at this point any patent infringement lawsuit against the iPhone is still within a reasonable time-frame.
It is Apple who is delaying and stalling and generally being a douchebag toward the rest of the cell phone industry here.This is Elan Microelectronics basically saying Apple should not be permitted to release a new potentially infringing product while they have litigation in progress that directly concerns the type product they are releasing.I think their position is completely reasonable, but I'll admit I might think differently if I were an Apple fan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675586</id>
	<title>And where's Logitech?</title>
	<author>earlymon</author>
	<datestamp>1269980280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to TFA, the patent in question is US Patent No. 5,825,352.  According to the US Patent and Trademark Office, Steven Bisset and Bernard Kasser are the sole inventors (filed 1996) of  the multi-touch tech - and Logitech was the assignee as of 1998.</p><p>According to this link, Elan was launched to do semiconductor R&amp;D in 1994, per <a href="http://www.computex.biz/elan/" title="computex.biz">http://www.computex.biz/elan/</a> [computex.biz]</p><p>SO - unless Elan bought this Logitech something's terribly wrong with the article.  Can anyone help me with this?</p><p>Elan is winning local awards, see - <a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-200983370.html" title="highbeam.com">http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-200983370.html</a> [highbeam.com]</p><p>but the idea that they themselves invented the tech on the patent in question is not accurate.  Here's their list of their achievements - <a href="http://www.emc.com.tw/eng/about\_elan1\_3.asp" title="emc.com.tw">http://www.emc.com.tw/eng/about\_elan1\_3.asp</a> [emc.com.tw]</p><p>I'm a little confused here.  Nothing wrong with selling technology and if Logitech did that, fine - but this sure seems like there's a lot more to this than "Apple rips off Taiwanese firm" - in my opinion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to TFA , the patent in question is US Patent No .
5,825,352. According to the US Patent and Trademark Office , Steven Bisset and Bernard Kasser are the sole inventors ( filed 1996 ) of the multi-touch tech - and Logitech was the assignee as of 1998.According to this link , Elan was launched to do semiconductor R&amp;D in 1994 , per http : //www.computex.biz/elan/ [ computex.biz ] SO - unless Elan bought this Logitech something 's terribly wrong with the article .
Can anyone help me with this ? Elan is winning local awards , see - http : //www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-200983370.html [ highbeam.com ] but the idea that they themselves invented the tech on the patent in question is not accurate .
Here 's their list of their achievements - http : //www.emc.com.tw/eng/about \ _elan1 \ _3.asp [ emc.com.tw ] I 'm a little confused here .
Nothing wrong with selling technology and if Logitech did that , fine - but this sure seems like there 's a lot more to this than " Apple rips off Taiwanese firm " - in my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to TFA, the patent in question is US Patent No.
5,825,352.  According to the US Patent and Trademark Office, Steven Bisset and Bernard Kasser are the sole inventors (filed 1996) of  the multi-touch tech - and Logitech was the assignee as of 1998.According to this link, Elan was launched to do semiconductor R&amp;D in 1994, per http://www.computex.biz/elan/ [computex.biz]SO - unless Elan bought this Logitech something's terribly wrong with the article.
Can anyone help me with this?Elan is winning local awards, see - http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-200983370.html [highbeam.com]but the idea that they themselves invented the tech on the patent in question is not accurate.
Here's their list of their achievements - http://www.emc.com.tw/eng/about\_elan1\_3.asp [emc.com.tw]I'm a little confused here.
Nothing wrong with selling technology and if Logitech did that, fine - but this sure seems like there's a lot more to this than "Apple rips off Taiwanese firm" - in my opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674712</id>
	<title>Re:Ugh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269976620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Patents are worth exactly nothing unless you can pay to defend them, and unless you're the size of Apple you can't.</p><p>So getting patents is not really about protecting your use of the technology, it's about giving you something to fight back with if another big name ever tries to sue you for use of their technology. When you're fighting the little guy you just plan to outspend them (or if necessary, to buy them).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Patents are worth exactly nothing unless you can pay to defend them , and unless you 're the size of Apple you ca n't.So getting patents is not really about protecting your use of the technology , it 's about giving you something to fight back with if another big name ever tries to sue you for use of their technology .
When you 're fighting the little guy you just plan to outspend them ( or if necessary , to buy them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patents are worth exactly nothing unless you can pay to defend them, and unless you're the size of Apple you can't.So getting patents is not really about protecting your use of the technology, it's about giving you something to fight back with if another big name ever tries to sue you for use of their technology.
When you're fighting the little guy you just plan to outspend them (or if necessary, to buy them).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674642</id>
	<title>Re:How do you say</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1269976440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt; 'I like to be touched' in Chinese?</p><p>I like this version better.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)     Reminds me of those old Nintendo DS ads.  Or this old Samatha Fox song  <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiuimDNlyuQ" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiuimDNlyuQ</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>And still looking rather fine at age 40: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tr7omqkY5A" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tr7omqkY5A</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; 'I like to be touched ' in Chinese ? I like this version better .
: - ) Reminds me of those old Nintendo DS ads .
Or this old Samatha Fox song http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = MiuimDNlyuQ [ youtube.com ] And still looking rather fine at age 40 : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 2tr7omqkY5A [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt; 'I like to be touched' in Chinese?I like this version better.
:-)     Reminds me of those old Nintendo DS ads.
Or this old Samatha Fox song  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiuimDNlyuQ [youtube.com]And still looking rather fine at age 40: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tr7omqkY5A [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673996</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31682036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31698958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31700800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31678226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31683354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_30_1559231_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31683354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31682036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31679232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31678226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31677552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31698958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675310
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31676130
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31700800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31674314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31675464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_30_1559231.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_30_1559231.31673956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
