<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_10_1515221</id>
	<title>Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244648820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>whisper\_jeff writes <i>"Ars has an excellent write up outlining how Kiwi Camara (Jammie Thomas-Rasset's <a href="//news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/19/2315237&amp;tid=123">new lawyer</a>) is following the 'Best Defense is a Good Offense' philosophy and going on the attack against the RIAA. Not content to just defend his client, he is laying siege against the RIAA's entire campaign and beginning the work of dismantling it from the bottom up, starting with the question of whether they actually do own the copyrights that were allegedly infringed. And, if you're thinking this is good for everyone who's been harassed by the RIAA, you'd be right &mdash; Camara, along with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson, <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/lawyers-plan-class-action-to-reclaim-100m-riaa-stole.ars">plans to file a class-action suit</a> seeking to force the RIAA to return all the (ill-gotten) money they've earned from their litigation campaign."</i>
We first discussed the efforts of Nesson and Camara to thwart the RIAA <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/22/1951237&amp;tid=123">last month</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>whisper \ _jeff writes " Ars has an excellent write up outlining how Kiwi Camara ( Jammie Thomas-Rasset 's new lawyer ) is following the 'Best Defense is a Good Offense ' philosophy and going on the attack against the RIAA .
Not content to just defend his client , he is laying siege against the RIAA 's entire campaign and beginning the work of dismantling it from the bottom up , starting with the question of whether they actually do own the copyrights that were allegedly infringed .
And , if you 're thinking this is good for everyone who 's been harassed by the RIAA , you 'd be right    Camara , along with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson , plans to file a class-action suit seeking to force the RIAA to return all the ( ill-gotten ) money they 've earned from their litigation campaign .
" We first discussed the efforts of Nesson and Camara to thwart the RIAA last month .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whisper\_jeff writes "Ars has an excellent write up outlining how Kiwi Camara (Jammie Thomas-Rasset's new lawyer) is following the 'Best Defense is a Good Offense' philosophy and going on the attack against the RIAA.
Not content to just defend his client, he is laying siege against the RIAA's entire campaign and beginning the work of dismantling it from the bottom up, starting with the question of whether they actually do own the copyrights that were allegedly infringed.
And, if you're thinking this is good for everyone who's been harassed by the RIAA, you'd be right — Camara, along with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson, plans to file a class-action suit seeking to force the RIAA to return all the (ill-gotten) money they've earned from their litigation campaign.
"
We first discussed the efforts of Nesson and Camara to thwart the RIAA last month.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281603</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, it's important because of the damages. We need somebody to lose so the court can rule that the damages are really something like $1/song, rather than $150,000/song.</p><p>dom</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it 's important because of the damages .
We need somebody to lose so the court can rule that the damages are really something like $ 1/song , rather than $ 150,000/song.dom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it's important because of the damages.
We need somebody to lose so the court can rule that the damages are really something like $1/song, rather than $150,000/song.dom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282751</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>TechForensics</author>
	<datestamp>1244661240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you see the part where he's teaming up with Charles Nesson to file his case?  I don't think we have to worry about rookie mistakes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you see the part where he 's teaming up with Charles Nesson to file his case ?
I do n't think we have to worry about rookie mistakes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you see the part where he's teaming up with Charles Nesson to file his case?
I don't think we have to worry about rookie mistakes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821</id>
	<title>lawyers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IANAL</p><p>Someone on slashdot once wrote "99\% of all lawyers make the rest of us look bad".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IANALSomeone on slashdot once wrote " 99 \ % of all lawyers make the rest of us look bad " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANALSomeone on slashdot once wrote "99\% of all lawyers make the rest of us look bad".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287961</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>kaffiene</author>
	<datestamp>1244643240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wondered about the name myself.  Is that supposed to be Kiwi as in the bird, or Kiwi as in Kiwifruit, or something else?  Neither of the first options sounds especially... um... normal.</p><p>Hey, what the hell, he's own our side.  As a New Zealander, I now have another reason to shout "Go Kiwi!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wondered about the name myself .
Is that supposed to be Kiwi as in the bird , or Kiwi as in Kiwifruit , or something else ?
Neither of the first options sounds especially... um... normal.Hey , what the hell , he 's own our side .
As a New Zealander , I now have another reason to shout " Go Kiwi !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wondered about the name myself.
Is that supposed to be Kiwi as in the bird, or Kiwi as in Kiwifruit, or something else?
Neither of the first options sounds especially... um... normal.Hey, what the hell, he's own our side.
As a New Zealander, I now have another reason to shout "Go Kiwi!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284663</id>
	<title>Shaky but I hope so!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244625900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I really hope they kick the RIAA's ass, but I think he's going to have a tough time unless the judge is very anti-RIAA.<br>
<br>
FTA:<br>
<i>Even if the RIAA comes up with the documents, though, Camara still has objections to their contents (or lack thereof). The registrations don't include the actual "specimen," for one thing (in this case the actual sound recording filed with the Copyright Office), so Camara says he has no way to know what was actually filed and whether it truly is identical with what Thomas-Rasset is accused of sharing.</i> <br>
<br>
Seems a little silly, and kind of a long shot.<br>
This could really get into a big mess with the copyright office and what consitutes a specimen of a recording.<br>
If the judge overrules the objection because he thinks it's silly, this one dies pretty easily.<br>
<br>
FTA #2:<br>
<i>He will also charge that the registrations are simply invalid, since they were all done in the names of the various record labels, not of the artists. But the "work for hire" law under which this was done has been improperly applied in these cases, he says, and the registrations are therefore defective.</i> <br>
<br>
Depending on where he and the court take this one, it could really bring about some change in the recording industry.<br>
As I understand it, when the artists sign their souls away to the recording studio, part of what they are signing away is their copyright.<br>
The studios like to justify this as fair because they have to put forth a lot of studio time, remastering, audio tuning, etc.
lots of things that are technically "part" of the artistic development, so they get to hold on to their sacred copyright.<br>
<br>
If the courts rule that ultimately the copyrights remain with the artist and are non-transferrable to a recording studio,
then the item remains as to whether the RIAA represents the "artists" as they say, or whether they represent the studios.<br>
<br>
The RIAA could still remain as a copyright attack dog, but they would end up having to pay money to the actual artists, and not the studios.<br>
Which means the studios won't back the RIAA, which means the RIAA will probably go away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hope they kick the RIAA 's ass , but I think he 's going to have a tough time unless the judge is very anti-RIAA .
FTA : Even if the RIAA comes up with the documents , though , Camara still has objections to their contents ( or lack thereof ) .
The registrations do n't include the actual " specimen , " for one thing ( in this case the actual sound recording filed with the Copyright Office ) , so Camara says he has no way to know what was actually filed and whether it truly is identical with what Thomas-Rasset is accused of sharing .
Seems a little silly , and kind of a long shot .
This could really get into a big mess with the copyright office and what consitutes a specimen of a recording .
If the judge overrules the objection because he thinks it 's silly , this one dies pretty easily .
FTA # 2 : He will also charge that the registrations are simply invalid , since they were all done in the names of the various record labels , not of the artists .
But the " work for hire " law under which this was done has been improperly applied in these cases , he says , and the registrations are therefore defective .
Depending on where he and the court take this one , it could really bring about some change in the recording industry .
As I understand it , when the artists sign their souls away to the recording studio , part of what they are signing away is their copyright .
The studios like to justify this as fair because they have to put forth a lot of studio time , remastering , audio tuning , etc .
lots of things that are technically " part " of the artistic development , so they get to hold on to their sacred copyright .
If the courts rule that ultimately the copyrights remain with the artist and are non-transferrable to a recording studio , then the item remains as to whether the RIAA represents the " artists " as they say , or whether they represent the studios .
The RIAA could still remain as a copyright attack dog , but they would end up having to pay money to the actual artists , and not the studios .
Which means the studios wo n't back the RIAA , which means the RIAA will probably go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hope they kick the RIAA's ass, but I think he's going to have a tough time unless the judge is very anti-RIAA.
FTA:
Even if the RIAA comes up with the documents, though, Camara still has objections to their contents (or lack thereof).
The registrations don't include the actual "specimen," for one thing (in this case the actual sound recording filed with the Copyright Office), so Camara says he has no way to know what was actually filed and whether it truly is identical with what Thomas-Rasset is accused of sharing.
Seems a little silly, and kind of a long shot.
This could really get into a big mess with the copyright office and what consitutes a specimen of a recording.
If the judge overrules the objection because he thinks it's silly, this one dies pretty easily.
FTA #2:
He will also charge that the registrations are simply invalid, since they were all done in the names of the various record labels, not of the artists.
But the "work for hire" law under which this was done has been improperly applied in these cases, he says, and the registrations are therefore defective.
Depending on where he and the court take this one, it could really bring about some change in the recording industry.
As I understand it, when the artists sign their souls away to the recording studio, part of what they are signing away is their copyright.
The studios like to justify this as fair because they have to put forth a lot of studio time, remastering, audio tuning, etc.
lots of things that are technically "part" of the artistic development, so they get to hold on to their sacred copyright.
If the courts rule that ultimately the copyrights remain with the artist and are non-transferrable to a recording studio,
then the item remains as to whether the RIAA represents the "artists" as they say, or whether they represent the studios.
The RIAA could still remain as a copyright attack dog, but they would end up having to pay money to the actual artists, and not the studios.
Which means the studios won't back the RIAA, which means the RIAA will probably go away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281093</id>
	<title>Even if it fails...</title>
	<author>SeeSp0tRun</author>
	<datestamp>1244654760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At the very least, I would hope that it will bring some real media coverage on the whole scandal.  Sure, we read about it on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. all the time, but how often do you see it covered at 5PM?  That will be the biggest test, because (from what I gather, and correct me if I am wrong) the same lobbyists who pull for the RIAA have a big hand in corporate media.
<br> <br>
It would be no surprise to me if the majority would love to see the RIAA burn to the ground, with a crater the size of Texas where they used to stand, and not so much as a memorial dog crap to mark the spot.  It is just getting the not-so-computer-savvy to actually give a damn.
<br> <br>
It's a great step though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At the very least , I would hope that it will bring some real media coverage on the whole scandal .
Sure , we read about it on / .
all the time , but how often do you see it covered at 5PM ?
That will be the biggest test , because ( from what I gather , and correct me if I am wrong ) the same lobbyists who pull for the RIAA have a big hand in corporate media .
It would be no surprise to me if the majority would love to see the RIAA burn to the ground , with a crater the size of Texas where they used to stand , and not so much as a memorial dog crap to mark the spot .
It is just getting the not-so-computer-savvy to actually give a damn .
It 's a great step though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the very least, I would hope that it will bring some real media coverage on the whole scandal.
Sure, we read about it on /.
all the time, but how often do you see it covered at 5PM?
That will be the biggest test, because (from what I gather, and correct me if I am wrong) the same lobbyists who pull for the RIAA have a big hand in corporate media.
It would be no surprise to me if the majority would love to see the RIAA burn to the ground, with a crater the size of Texas where they used to stand, and not so much as a memorial dog crap to mark the spot.
It is just getting the not-so-computer-savvy to actually give a damn.
It's a great step though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281543</id>
	<title>Re:A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>Endo13</author>
	<datestamp>1244656500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like they're all out of bubblegum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like they 're all out of bubblegum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like they're all out of bubblegum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283777</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>radish</author>
	<datestamp>1244665560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any artist who wants to self publish/promote is quite free to do so. However, most choose to sign with a label (major or otherwise). They've made their choice - they've willingly handed over their copyrights (at least in most cases, not all contracts involve transfer of copyrights) so why should they get them back now just because you or I don't particularly like the RIAA? We've got nothing to do with it, it's a business deal between the label and the artist - entered into willingly by both sides for the benefit of both sides.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any artist who wants to self publish/promote is quite free to do so .
However , most choose to sign with a label ( major or otherwise ) .
They 've made their choice - they 've willingly handed over their copyrights ( at least in most cases , not all contracts involve transfer of copyrights ) so why should they get them back now just because you or I do n't particularly like the RIAA ?
We 've got nothing to do with it , it 's a business deal between the label and the artist - entered into willingly by both sides for the benefit of both sides .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any artist who wants to self publish/promote is quite free to do so.
However, most choose to sign with a label (major or otherwise).
They've made their choice - they've willingly handed over their copyrights (at least in most cases, not all contracts involve transfer of copyrights) so why should they get them back now just because you or I don't particularly like the RIAA?
We've got nothing to do with it, it's a business deal between the label and the artist - entered into willingly by both sides for the benefit of both sides.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280993</id>
	<title>Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244654400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually I would like to see Open Source/ Creative Commons type licences covering intellectual and creative works. With a good dash of community pooling of resources to sue any big corporation that infringes the above IP. <br>The situation we have now of large companies using the law to lock down markets would change. If they they feel they are being controlled and constrained by laws they initiated, the law will change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I would like to see Open Source/ Creative Commons type licences covering intellectual and creative works .
With a good dash of community pooling of resources to sue any big corporation that infringes the above IP .
The situation we have now of large companies using the law to lock down markets would change .
If they they feel they are being controlled and constrained by laws they initiated , the law will change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I would like to see Open Source/ Creative Commons type licences covering intellectual and creative works.
With a good dash of community pooling of resources to sue any big corporation that infringes the above IP.
The situation we have now of large companies using the law to lock down markets would change.
If they they feel they are being controlled and constrained by laws they initiated, the law will change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1244655540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.</p><p>Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power. How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can say that about many professions , from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer ca n't even possibly have unless he 's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power .
How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.
How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</id>
	<title>A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's time to kick some serious RIAA boo-tay.
<br> <br>
On a more serious note, it warms my heart to find that there is at least a couple of "good" lawyers out there who have their clients best interest at heart.
<br> <br>
NYCountryLawyer excluded - dude you do good work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to kick some serious RIAA boo-tay .
On a more serious note , it warms my heart to find that there is at least a couple of " good " lawyers out there who have their clients best interest at heart .
NYCountryLawyer excluded - dude you do good work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to kick some serious RIAA boo-tay.
On a more serious note, it warms my heart to find that there is at least a couple of "good" lawyers out there who have their clients best interest at heart.
NYCountryLawyer excluded - dude you do good work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286703</id>
	<title>It's all in the price for a song</title>
	<author>PleaseFearMe</author>
	<datestamp>1244634720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Litigation is the only way to enforce the high prices they charge for each song.  The average person can either 1) pay for the song and get in no trouble or 2) torrent the song and possibly get into big trouble.  Equilibrium is when the two choices are equally attractive.  When the "big trouble" has the price tag of hundreds of thousands of dollars, you know something is problematic in the balance.  It is like a tiny pebble trying to balance a huge boulder on a see-saw, the pebble has to be so unreasonably far from the fulcrum.  If only the music companies can price the songs at around 10 cents each, then the see-saw would be more reasonable, ie, the pebble can become larger so it can get closer towards the fulcrum.  Personally, I see individual songs as a small, almost throwaway value of a dime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Litigation is the only way to enforce the high prices they charge for each song .
The average person can either 1 ) pay for the song and get in no trouble or 2 ) torrent the song and possibly get into big trouble .
Equilibrium is when the two choices are equally attractive .
When the " big trouble " has the price tag of hundreds of thousands of dollars , you know something is problematic in the balance .
It is like a tiny pebble trying to balance a huge boulder on a see-saw , the pebble has to be so unreasonably far from the fulcrum .
If only the music companies can price the songs at around 10 cents each , then the see-saw would be more reasonable , ie , the pebble can become larger so it can get closer towards the fulcrum .
Personally , I see individual songs as a small , almost throwaway value of a dime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Litigation is the only way to enforce the high prices they charge for each song.
The average person can either 1) pay for the song and get in no trouble or 2) torrent the song and possibly get into big trouble.
Equilibrium is when the two choices are equally attractive.
When the "big trouble" has the price tag of hundreds of thousands of dollars, you know something is problematic in the balance.
It is like a tiny pebble trying to balance a huge boulder on a see-saw, the pebble has to be so unreasonably far from the fulcrum.
If only the music companies can price the songs at around 10 cents each, then the see-saw would be more reasonable, ie, the pebble can become larger so it can get closer towards the fulcrum.
Personally, I see individual songs as a small, almost throwaway value of a dime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281453</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>ultraexactzz</author>
	<datestamp>1244656140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.</p></div></blockquote><p>This raises a question - do we actually have a tally of the damages so far? That is to say, do we know how much money the RIAA has taken in as a result of settlements, litigation, and shenanigans? Would the loss of these revenues (for lack of a better term) represent a big enough percentage of overall income to push the RIAA toward some reorganization/bankruptcy/bailout?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK , the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently , probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.This raises a question - do we actually have a tally of the damages so far ?
That is to say , do we know how much money the RIAA has taken in as a result of settlements , litigation , and shenanigans ?
Would the loss of these revenues ( for lack of a better term ) represent a big enough percentage of overall income to push the RIAA toward some reorganization/bankruptcy/bailout ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.This raises a question - do we actually have a tally of the damages so far?
That is to say, do we know how much money the RIAA has taken in as a result of settlements, litigation, and shenanigans?
Would the loss of these revenues (for lack of a better term) represent a big enough percentage of overall income to push the RIAA toward some reorganization/bankruptcy/bailout?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282419</id>
	<title>Re:A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>billcopc</author>
	<datestamp>1244659920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A little bit of heart, a little bit of cash, a TON of free advertising.  This lawyer hasn't even won anything yet, and already they're being praised in the net media.  Win or lose, this person's name will remain famous for some time to come.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A little bit of heart , a little bit of cash , a TON of free advertising .
This lawyer has n't even won anything yet , and already they 're being praised in the net media .
Win or lose , this person 's name will remain famous for some time to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A little bit of heart, a little bit of cash, a TON of free advertising.
This lawyer hasn't even won anything yet, and already they're being praised in the net media.
Win or lose, this person's name will remain famous for some time to come.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282487</id>
	<title>obligatory star wars reference</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1244660160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the part where the Empire has the Death Star and then gets it's ass handed to it for being evil and idiots.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the part where the Empire has the Death Star and then gets it 's ass handed to it for being evil and idiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the part where the Empire has the Death Star and then gets it's ass handed to it for being evil and idiots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281255</id>
	<title>woo!</title>
	<author>n30na</author>
	<datestamp>1244655360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hack the planet! er, wait...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hack the planet !
er , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hack the planet!
er, wait...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282599</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1244660640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said</p><p>I admire anyone who stands up and says "I believe that fundamentally it should be ok for me to just take copyrighted content"*</p><p>That takes balls, because it means you open yourself up to arrest and a serious fine, if not worse.<br>And that is exactly what people do who actually believe in something. I've put my own ass on the line and risked arrest for political issues in the past.<br>I don't see ANYONE doing this over the copyright issue. Everyone talks a tough fight behind a keyboard, but they also talk a lot about using anonymous services and masking their identity. Hardly the work of crusaders trying to change the law.</p><p>Even TPB claim its not them who are breaking any laws. if they actually believed in 'the cause' they would admit they are breaking the, and say they do so to get it changed.</p><p>Could it maybe be that getting free music is *not* worth a criminal record after all?</p><p>*I still completely dispute the premise that its ok to do this, and think people who espouse it are naive at best, but I can admire people who are naive and wrong, if they at least stand for something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well saidI admire anyone who stands up and says " I believe that fundamentally it should be ok for me to just take copyrighted content " * That takes balls , because it means you open yourself up to arrest and a serious fine , if not worse.And that is exactly what people do who actually believe in something .
I 've put my own ass on the line and risked arrest for political issues in the past.I do n't see ANYONE doing this over the copyright issue .
Everyone talks a tough fight behind a keyboard , but they also talk a lot about using anonymous services and masking their identity .
Hardly the work of crusaders trying to change the law.Even TPB claim its not them who are breaking any laws .
if they actually believed in 'the cause ' they would admit they are breaking the , and say they do so to get it changed.Could it maybe be that getting free music is * not * worth a criminal record after all ?
* I still completely dispute the premise that its ok to do this , and think people who espouse it are naive at best , but I can admire people who are naive and wrong , if they at least stand for something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well saidI admire anyone who stands up and says "I believe that fundamentally it should be ok for me to just take copyrighted content"*That takes balls, because it means you open yourself up to arrest and a serious fine, if not worse.And that is exactly what people do who actually believe in something.
I've put my own ass on the line and risked arrest for political issues in the past.I don't see ANYONE doing this over the copyright issue.
Everyone talks a tough fight behind a keyboard, but they also talk a lot about using anonymous services and masking their identity.
Hardly the work of crusaders trying to change the law.Even TPB claim its not them who are breaking any laws.
if they actually believed in 'the cause' they would admit they are breaking the, and say they do so to get it changed.Could it maybe be that getting free music is *not* worth a criminal record after all?
*I still completely dispute the premise that its ok to do this, and think people who espouse it are naive at best, but I can admire people who are naive and wrong, if they at least stand for something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280945</id>
	<title>It'll never happen</title>
	<author>kcredden</author>
	<datestamp>1244654160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although we can dream, yes?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>They'll pay off some lawmaker like they're doing still.</p><p>- Kc</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although we can dream , yes ?
: ) They 'll pay off some lawmaker like they 're doing still.- Kc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although we can dream, yes?
:)They'll pay off some lawmaker like they're doing still.- Kc</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282287</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi Camara is a race troll</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1244659380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He sounds like trouble in a box!</p></div><p>He does?  Did you only read that one paragraph in the wikipedia article?  Here's another part:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Camara was born in Manila, Philippines [<b>in 1984</b>]. A year later, his family moved to Cleveland, Ohio before settling in Honolulu, Hawaii, where Camara attended the Punahou School.[1] He wrote a medical paper on alternative treatments for rheumatoid arthritis at age eleven,[1] which was published in the Hawai'i Journal of Medicine.[2] At sixteen, having skipped high school, Camara earned a Bachelor of Science in computer science from Hawaii Pacific University.[2] He completed the program in two years and was singularly recognized by the university for outstanding academic performance.[2] The Philippines awarded him their Jose Rizal Certificate of Achievement while he was in college and later, in 2005, recognized him with a Presidential Commendation.[3]</p></div><p>Yeah man, watch out for that guy, you see him coming and you better go the other way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He sounds like trouble in a box ! He does ?
Did you only read that one paragraph in the wikipedia article ?
Here 's another part : Camara was born in Manila , Philippines [ in 1984 ] .
A year later , his family moved to Cleveland , Ohio before settling in Honolulu , Hawaii , where Camara attended the Punahou School .
[ 1 ] He wrote a medical paper on alternative treatments for rheumatoid arthritis at age eleven , [ 1 ] which was published in the Hawai'i Journal of Medicine .
[ 2 ] At sixteen , having skipped high school , Camara earned a Bachelor of Science in computer science from Hawaii Pacific University .
[ 2 ] He completed the program in two years and was singularly recognized by the university for outstanding academic performance .
[ 2 ] The Philippines awarded him their Jose Rizal Certificate of Achievement while he was in college and later , in 2005 , recognized him with a Presidential Commendation .
[ 3 ] Yeah man , watch out for that guy , you see him coming and you better go the other way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He sounds like trouble in a box!He does?
Did you only read that one paragraph in the wikipedia article?
Here's another part:Camara was born in Manila, Philippines [in 1984].
A year later, his family moved to Cleveland, Ohio before settling in Honolulu, Hawaii, where Camara attended the Punahou School.
[1] He wrote a medical paper on alternative treatments for rheumatoid arthritis at age eleven,[1] which was published in the Hawai'i Journal of Medicine.
[2] At sixteen, having skipped high school, Camara earned a Bachelor of Science in computer science from Hawaii Pacific University.
[2] He completed the program in two years and was singularly recognized by the university for outstanding academic performance.
[2] The Philippines awarded him their Jose Rizal Certificate of Achievement while he was in college and later, in 2005, recognized him with a Presidential Commendation.
[3]Yeah man, watch out for that guy, you see him coming and you better go the other way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281075</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281813</id>
	<title>Retroactive Immunity</title>
	<author>Tokolosh</author>
	<datestamp>1244657580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IF RIAA loses, then look forward to retroactive immunity and a moving of the goalposts, a la the telcoms illegal wiretapping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IF RIAA loses , then look forward to retroactive immunity and a moving of the goalposts , a la the telcoms illegal wiretapping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IF RIAA loses, then look forward to retroactive immunity and a moving of the goalposts, a la the telcoms illegal wiretapping.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288221</id>
	<title>BSA</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1244645220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The BSA acts on behalf of their clients, the RIAA/MPAA claims actual ownership. Sort of a different deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The BSA acts on behalf of their clients , the RIAA/MPAA claims actual ownership .
Sort of a different deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The BSA acts on behalf of their clients, the RIAA/MPAA claims actual ownership.
Sort of a different deal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281911</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>The Redster!</author>
	<datestamp>1244657880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Acronym Production Lead?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Acronym Production Lead ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Acronym Production Lead?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281949</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>wfstanle</author>
	<datestamp>1244658000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Very good point.  Although we are hurting now, isn't it better to wait for when an appeal has a better chance of giving us a favorable outcome?  It would be disastrous if a case went all the way to SCOTUS and fair use was struck down?  I don't know how the present justices stand on fair use policies but lately they don't seem to be for the little guy.  Isn't it better to wait for a more favorable time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Very good point .
Although we are hurting now , is n't it better to wait for when an appeal has a better chance of giving us a favorable outcome ?
It would be disastrous if a case went all the way to SCOTUS and fair use was struck down ?
I do n't know how the present justices stand on fair use policies but lately they do n't seem to be for the little guy .
Is n't it better to wait for a more favorable time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very good point.
Although we are hurting now, isn't it better to wait for when an appeal has a better chance of giving us a favorable outcome?
It would be disastrous if a case went all the way to SCOTUS and fair use was struck down?
I don't know how the present justices stand on fair use policies but lately they don't seem to be for the little guy.
Isn't it better to wait for a more favorable time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28290445</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>bronney</author>
	<datestamp>1244753880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly the same here bro.  It was until someone capped all the first letters when posting "I Am Not A Lawyer" that I started to pick up on the rest of these.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly the same here bro .
It was until someone capped all the first letters when posting " I Am Not A Lawyer " that I started to pick up on the rest of these .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly the same here bro.
It was until someone capped all the first letters when posting "I Am Not A Lawyer" that I started to pick up on the rest of these.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281925</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244657880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, Kiwi is a dude... i dont want to see that tv show.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , Kiwi is a dude... i dont want to see that tv show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, Kiwi is a dude... i dont want to see that tv show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280501</id>
	<title>Camera goes on offense against RIAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Refuses to film copyrighted content!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Refuses to film copyrighted content !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Refuses to film copyrighted content!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283355</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>Lorien\_the\_first\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1244664000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean they would pull a SCO?  Naw....</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean they would pull a SCO ?
Naw... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean they would pull a SCO?
Naw....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283391</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1244664060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, you must be the legal counsel to the EFF. Nice to meet ya.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , you must be the legal counsel to the EFF .
Nice to meet ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, you must be the legal counsel to the EFF.
Nice to meet ya.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280875</id>
	<title>Let's pretend they win. Who gets the money?</title>
	<author>chemosh6969</author>
	<datestamp>1244653920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In class action lawsuits, the lawyers are the ones that get most of the money. A tiny sliver will go to the people that tried to win it back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In class action lawsuits , the lawyers are the ones that get most of the money .
A tiny sliver will go to the people that tried to win it back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In class action lawsuits, the lawyers are the ones that get most of the money.
A tiny sliver will go to the people that tried to win it back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281983</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Mordok-DestroyerOfWo</author>
	<datestamp>1244658060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember when I first started reading<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. (well before I signed up for an account) I would often seen IANAL.  I didn't pick up on what it was for the longest time, I just figured it was people really into anal, either that or Apple's latest piece of hardware.  Remember, when the iAnal 3G comes out to get the one with 32GB of capacity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when I first started reading / .
( well before I signed up for an account ) I would often seen IANAL .
I did n't pick up on what it was for the longest time , I just figured it was people really into anal , either that or Apple 's latest piece of hardware .
Remember , when the iAnal 3G comes out to get the one with 32GB of capacity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when I first started reading /.
(well before I signed up for an account) I would often seen IANAL.
I didn't pick up on what it was for the longest time, I just figured it was people really into anal, either that or Apple's latest piece of hardware.
Remember, when the iAnal 3G comes out to get the one with 32GB of capacity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205</id>
	<title>I have a stupid question</title>
	<author>bitt3n</author>
	<datestamp>1244655180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the RIAA can go after people based on their IP address, why can't law enforcement press charges based on a DNA profile they find at a crime scene? The latter is doubtless more useful as a means of identifying the perpetrator, and that would presumably prevent the statute of limitations from running out. I'm not proposing this would be just, but I don't think that would stop the law from doing it without a court case. Is this something that's done, and I never heard about it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the RIAA can go after people based on their IP address , why ca n't law enforcement press charges based on a DNA profile they find at a crime scene ?
The latter is doubtless more useful as a means of identifying the perpetrator , and that would presumably prevent the statute of limitations from running out .
I 'm not proposing this would be just , but I do n't think that would stop the law from doing it without a court case .
Is this something that 's done , and I never heard about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the RIAA can go after people based on their IP address, why can't law enforcement press charges based on a DNA profile they find at a crime scene?
The latter is doubtless more useful as a means of identifying the perpetrator, and that would presumably prevent the statute of limitations from running out.
I'm not proposing this would be just, but I don't think that would stop the law from doing it without a court case.
Is this something that's done, and I never heard about it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491</id>
	<title>Hmmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does the Campaign for Real Ale have against the RIAA?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does the Campaign for Real Ale have against the RIAA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does the Campaign for Real Ale have against the RIAA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282341</id>
	<title>But!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244659560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.</p></div><p>But with enough practice, sword-chucks can be nearly as dangerous to the opponent as they are to the person weilding them!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.But with enough practice , sword-chucks can be nearly as dangerous to the opponent as they are to the person weilding them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.But with enough practice, sword-chucks can be nearly as dangerous to the opponent as they are to the person weilding them!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282413</id>
	<title>Re:A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244659860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Without defending the RIAA I find this an unfortunate mickey mouse legal strategy. Suppose the RIAA does hold the copyrights? Does that make their legal arguments correct?  Presumably there are are least some copyright holders who want compensation from downloaders. We need to get a handle on the broader questions. What are the legal rights if any of copyright holders to obtain financial compensation from downloading? While the legal sparring in individual cases is of great importance to the parties involved if the case is decided on legal technicalities (e.g. a late filing) or tangential issues it is not very important.</p><p>Here are two typical opposing arguments I find most distasteful:</p><p>From the downloaders: I have a moral or legal right to download material for free and anyone who disagrees is greedy and evil.<br>From the content creators: Free internet downloading is bringing about the end of civilization as we know it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Without defending the RIAA I find this an unfortunate mickey mouse legal strategy .
Suppose the RIAA does hold the copyrights ?
Does that make their legal arguments correct ?
Presumably there are are least some copyright holders who want compensation from downloaders .
We need to get a handle on the broader questions .
What are the legal rights if any of copyright holders to obtain financial compensation from downloading ?
While the legal sparring in individual cases is of great importance to the parties involved if the case is decided on legal technicalities ( e.g .
a late filing ) or tangential issues it is not very important.Here are two typical opposing arguments I find most distasteful : From the downloaders : I have a moral or legal right to download material for free and anyone who disagrees is greedy and evil.From the content creators : Free internet downloading is bringing about the end of civilization as we know it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without defending the RIAA I find this an unfortunate mickey mouse legal strategy.
Suppose the RIAA does hold the copyrights?
Does that make their legal arguments correct?
Presumably there are are least some copyright holders who want compensation from downloaders.
We need to get a handle on the broader questions.
What are the legal rights if any of copyright holders to obtain financial compensation from downloading?
While the legal sparring in individual cases is of great importance to the parties involved if the case is decided on legal technicalities (e.g.
a late filing) or tangential issues it is not very important.Here are two typical opposing arguments I find most distasteful:From the downloaders: I have a moral or legal right to download material for free and anyone who disagrees is greedy and evil.From the content creators: Free internet downloading is bringing about the end of civilization as we know it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282459</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244660040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The third period of what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The third period of what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The third period of what?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288653</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1244648820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's put it that way, an electrician can outright kill you if knows his job (or doesn't...) and make it look like a freak accident.</p><p>Can a lawyer top that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's put it that way , an electrician can outright kill you if knows his job ( or does n't... ) and make it look like a freak accident.Can a lawyer top that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's put it that way, an electrician can outright kill you if knows his job (or doesn't...) and make it look like a freak accident.Can a lawyer top that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284893</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>greenbird</author>
	<datestamp>1244626680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a religon. And they'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.</p></div><p>Yeah, devil worship.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except Redwings Hockey is n't a sport , it 's a religon .
And they 'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.Yeah , devil worship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a religon.
And they'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.Yeah, devil worship.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280707</id>
	<title>Hmm.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish them the very best of luck - thats a very powerful business lobby with a lot of politicians in pocket that they are going after.</p><p>Still, its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish them the very best of luck - thats a very powerful business lobby with a lot of politicians in pocket that they are going after.Still , its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish them the very best of luck - thats a very powerful business lobby with a lot of politicians in pocket that they are going after.Still, its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283301</id>
	<title>Re:Not best chocie of defendent</title>
	<author>NormalVisual</author>
	<datestamp>1244663760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can't make a big deal of a fight that doesn't exist.  Yes, the RIAA has acted shamefully, but the vast majority of people that they've strong-armed over the years did in fact settle, so they're done - there's no fight for them to pursue.  I'd agree that Jammie Thomas probably isn't the best defendant to be involved in this, but she fought back, unlike most of the others, and she's going to be getting a whole new trial, which is a *huge* deal and gives her new lawyer all kinds of legal options to explore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't make a big deal of a fight that does n't exist .
Yes , the RIAA has acted shamefully , but the vast majority of people that they 've strong-armed over the years did in fact settle , so they 're done - there 's no fight for them to pursue .
I 'd agree that Jammie Thomas probably is n't the best defendant to be involved in this , but she fought back , unlike most of the others , and she 's going to be getting a whole new trial , which is a * huge * deal and gives her new lawyer all kinds of legal options to explore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't make a big deal of a fight that doesn't exist.
Yes, the RIAA has acted shamefully, but the vast majority of people that they've strong-armed over the years did in fact settle, so they're done - there's no fight for them to pursue.
I'd agree that Jammie Thomas probably isn't the best defendant to be involved in this, but she fought back, unlike most of the others, and she's going to be getting a whole new trial, which is a *huge* deal and gives her new lawyer all kinds of legal options to explore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281419</id>
	<title>Here's a thought...</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1244655960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know in most cases where class action suits are filed, the attorneys filing and operating the case get a rather sizeable chunk of the take.  If/when this class action is filed and won, does Kiwi intend to take from the rich to give to the poor or will he take a sizeable chunk for himself?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know in most cases where class action suits are filed , the attorneys filing and operating the case get a rather sizeable chunk of the take .
If/when this class action is filed and won , does Kiwi intend to take from the rich to give to the poor or will he take a sizeable chunk for himself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know in most cases where class action suits are filed, the attorneys filing and operating the case get a rather sizeable chunk of the take.
If/when this class action is filed and won, does Kiwi intend to take from the rich to give to the poor or will he take a sizeable chunk for himself?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283429</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>NewYorkCountryLawyer</author>
	<datestamp>1244664180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAA</p></div><p>Wrong.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> nor have the checks been written to "the RIAA"</p></div><p>And wrong. <br> <br>Care to try for a third incorrect statement?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAAWrong .
nor have the checks been written to " the RIAA " And wrong .
Care to try for a third incorrect statement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAAWrong.
nor have the checks been written to "the RIAA"And wrong.
Care to try for a third incorrect statement?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282679</id>
	<title>Re:I have a stupid question</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1244660940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure here in the UK people are caught and prosecuted on the basis of DNA evidence all the time. Even years after the crime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure here in the UK people are caught and prosecuted on the basis of DNA evidence all the time .
Even years after the crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure here in the UK people are caught and prosecuted on the basis of DNA evidence all the time.
Even years after the crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286269</id>
	<title>Copyrights are owned by someone</title>
	<author>EvilGrin5000</author>
	<datestamp>1244632320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IANAL but I was thinking:<br><br>even if the RIAA doesn't hold legitimate copyrights to the music they sued for, somebody -does- have copyrights. The author of the song or the artist that played it or whomever. I guess returning the ill-gotten money is a great start and an ambitious goal (and I wish Camara all the best in this awesome quest) but when they settle to who actually owns the copyrights (unless it is 100\% the buyer or public domain or fair use) it won't stop the true owner of the copyrights to go after the file-sharer no?<br><br>So if RIAA returns money<br>Artist is found to hold true copyrights<br>Artist can sue for said money now?<br><br>What are the implications of this outcome?<br>Maybe I'm thinking waaaaay ahead and I need to let it unfold some more?</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL but I was thinking : even if the RIAA does n't hold legitimate copyrights to the music they sued for , somebody -does- have copyrights .
The author of the song or the artist that played it or whomever .
I guess returning the ill-gotten money is a great start and an ambitious goal ( and I wish Camara all the best in this awesome quest ) but when they settle to who actually owns the copyrights ( unless it is 100 \ % the buyer or public domain or fair use ) it wo n't stop the true owner of the copyrights to go after the file-sharer no ? So if RIAA returns moneyArtist is found to hold true copyrightsArtist can sue for said money now ? What are the implications of this outcome ? Maybe I 'm thinking waaaaay ahead and I need to let it unfold some more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL but I was thinking:even if the RIAA doesn't hold legitimate copyrights to the music they sued for, somebody -does- have copyrights.
The author of the song or the artist that played it or whomever.
I guess returning the ill-gotten money is a great start and an ambitious goal (and I wish Camara all the best in this awesome quest) but when they settle to who actually owns the copyrights (unless it is 100\% the buyer or public domain or fair use) it won't stop the true owner of the copyrights to go after the file-sharer no?So if RIAA returns moneyArtist is found to hold true copyrightsArtist can sue for said money now?What are the implications of this outcome?Maybe I'm thinking waaaaay ahead and I need to let it unfold some more?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281857</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244657760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go Pens!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go Pens ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go Pens!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281947</id>
	<title>Admirable, but Quixotic...</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1244658000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't have a prayer. The legal system is this country is so bent it's going to snap in half.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't have a prayer .
The legal system is this country is so bent it 's going to snap in half .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't have a prayer.
The legal system is this country is so bent it's going to snap in half.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282519</id>
	<title>Not best chocie of defendent</title>
	<author>cliffski</author>
	<datestamp>1244660340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to make the point that the RIAA's tactics are wrong and that their evidence is shaky (both true), then it might be a good idea to try and make a big hoo-hah out of a case where they sued someone who didn't own a PC or was in another country at the time.<br>Lets be honest about this, This woman is guilty as hell. The fact that she is so bloody minded as to proclaim her innocence so long after the fact is fascinating, but she is hardly a decent poster child for people who claim that the RIAA are going after the wrong people.<br>Isn't she the person who tried to destroy her hard drive after she got caught?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to make the point that the RIAA 's tactics are wrong and that their evidence is shaky ( both true ) , then it might be a good idea to try and make a big hoo-hah out of a case where they sued someone who did n't own a PC or was in another country at the time.Lets be honest about this , This woman is guilty as hell .
The fact that she is so bloody minded as to proclaim her innocence so long after the fact is fascinating , but she is hardly a decent poster child for people who claim that the RIAA are going after the wrong people.Is n't she the person who tried to destroy her hard drive after she got caught ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to make the point that the RIAA's tactics are wrong and that their evidence is shaky (both true), then it might be a good idea to try and make a big hoo-hah out of a case where they sued someone who didn't own a PC or was in another country at the time.Lets be honest about this, This woman is guilty as hell.
The fact that she is so bloody minded as to proclaim her innocence so long after the fact is fascinating, but she is hardly a decent poster child for people who claim that the RIAA are going after the wrong people.Isn't she the person who tried to destroy her hard drive after she got caught?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281515</id>
	<title>Re:A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All layers are playing the same game.  Some represent the guilty party some represent the victim but aboth sides make tons of cash of litigation.  You really think this lawyer is doing it out of the good of his heart or is it for the cash?  Maybe both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All layers are playing the same game .
Some represent the guilty party some represent the victim but aboth sides make tons of cash of litigation .
You really think this lawyer is doing it out of the good of his heart or is it for the cash ?
Maybe both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All layers are playing the same game.
Some represent the guilty party some represent the victim but aboth sides make tons of cash of litigation.
You really think this lawyer is doing it out of the good of his heart or is it for the cash?
Maybe both.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282051</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244658360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Holy cow, intellectual honesty about file sharing on Slashdot.  It's a miracle!</p><p>Unlike intellectual property, which can be pilfered, intellectual honesty costs something.  That's okay.  It's worth something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Holy cow , intellectual honesty about file sharing on Slashdot .
It 's a miracle ! Unlike intellectual property , which can be pilfered , intellectual honesty costs something .
That 's okay .
It 's worth something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Holy cow, intellectual honesty about file sharing on Slashdot.
It's a miracle!Unlike intellectual property, which can be pilfered, intellectual honesty costs something.
That's okay.
It's worth something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289473</id>
	<title>they put the pro in pro-bono</title>
	<author>JackSpratts</author>
	<datestamp>1244656920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"pro-bono" contingency lawyers are the last ones who want to see all funds returned to so-called victims. taking those 100 million riaa bux and keeping 30\% or more for themselves seems a lot more likely. nevertheless sticking it to the media giant man deserves a few hosannas, even if it's impossible to separate the greed from the other ambiguities motivating this latest escapade.</p><p> - js.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" pro-bono " contingency lawyers are the last ones who want to see all funds returned to so-called victims .
taking those 100 million riaa bux and keeping 30 \ % or more for themselves seems a lot more likely .
nevertheless sticking it to the media giant man deserves a few hosannas , even if it 's impossible to separate the greed from the other ambiguities motivating this latest escapade .
- js .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"pro-bono" contingency lawyers are the last ones who want to see all funds returned to so-called victims.
taking those 100 million riaa bux and keeping 30\% or more for themselves seems a lot more likely.
nevertheless sticking it to the media giant man deserves a few hosannas, even if it's impossible to separate the greed from the other ambiguities motivating this latest escapade.
- js.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281529</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>rastilin</author>
	<datestamp>1244656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A valid point, however anyone had the opportunity to do something like this before and not one person took up the challenge. Not one of those highly experienced lawyers could be bothered or was willing to take the risk; so as he is the first to step up to the plate, he can take the swing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A valid point , however anyone had the opportunity to do something like this before and not one person took up the challenge .
Not one of those highly experienced lawyers could be bothered or was willing to take the risk ; so as he is the first to step up to the plate , he can take the swing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A valid point, however anyone had the opportunity to do something like this before and not one person took up the challenge.
Not one of those highly experienced lawyers could be bothered or was willing to take the risk; so as he is the first to step up to the plate, he can take the swing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282681</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Shagg</author>
	<datestamp>1244660940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and she's "obviously guilty" only if the "evidence" collected by an unlicensed PI is admissible.</p><p>The whole point of this is that the things that make her look "obviously guilty" are highly questionable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and she 's " obviously guilty " only if the " evidence " collected by an unlicensed PI is admissible.The whole point of this is that the things that make her look " obviously guilty " are highly questionable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and she's "obviously guilty" only if the "evidence" collected by an unlicensed PI is admissible.The whole point of this is that the things that make her look "obviously guilty" are highly questionable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244655000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer.  Its a  good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.</p></div><p>Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it? Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit. If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts. The RIAA may resort to reality distortion, but that doesn't mean we should.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sucks that this is n't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who does n't even know hot to turn on a computer .
Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid , because otherwise I 'd find it much harder to root for her side.Well that would be kind of dishonest , would n't it ?
Your average file-sharing culprit is n't an innocent old grandpa , but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use , full well knowing it 's illicit .
If we 're going to defend file sharing , let 's be honest and call things for what they are , and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts .
The RIAA may resort to reality distortion , but that does n't mean we should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer.
Its a  good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it?
Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit.
If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts.
The RIAA may resort to reality distortion, but that doesn't mean we should.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280559</id>
	<title>Camara is a friend to all children!</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1244652780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's that?  A giant turtle known as Camara is attacking the city hmmm!?  As you know the turtle Camara is attracted to fire I believe we can use this to lure him into a fight with Gaos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's that ?
A giant turtle known as Camara is attacking the city hmmm ! ?
As you know the turtle Camara is attracted to fire I believe we can use this to lure him into a fight with Gaos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's that?
A giant turtle known as Camara is attacking the city hmmm!?
As you know the turtle Camara is attracted to fire I believe we can use this to lure him into a fight with Gaos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280617</id>
	<title>project trilogy and coolruc; peer-to-peer IPTV</title>
	<author>lkcl</author>
	<datestamp>1244653020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hooray!  this comes at just the right time for <a href="http://www.i2cat.net/i2cat/servlet/I2CAT.MainServlet?seccio=16\_51\_3" title="i2cat.net" rel="nofollow">coolruc</a> [i2cat.net] p2p video broadcasting to make headway without legal threats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hooray !
this comes at just the right time for coolruc [ i2cat.net ] p2p video broadcasting to make headway without legal threats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hooray!
this comes at just the right time for coolruc [i2cat.net] p2p video broadcasting to make headway without legal threats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288205</id>
	<title>Return of ill-gained moines</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1244645160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't count on it. even if they lose, they will just claim they are a company that 'cant fail' and get a free pass from the Federal Government as they file bankruptcy and wash it all away. just like Chrysler did when they were absolved of their obligations to creditors after the filing ( short version - liquidation of their billions in assets was bypassed with agreement with the Feds and left people holding the bag, which normally would NOT happen in a bankruptcy like this. Bond holders and creditors get first grab at the assets, not some foreign company waving cash ).</p><p>Hey, its 'change', not following the law, right? Pfft</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't count on it .
even if they lose , they will just claim they are a company that 'cant fail ' and get a free pass from the Federal Government as they file bankruptcy and wash it all away .
just like Chrysler did when they were absolved of their obligations to creditors after the filing ( short version - liquidation of their billions in assets was bypassed with agreement with the Feds and left people holding the bag , which normally would NOT happen in a bankruptcy like this .
Bond holders and creditors get first grab at the assets , not some foreign company waving cash ) .Hey , its 'change ' , not following the law , right ?
Pfft</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't count on it.
even if they lose, they will just claim they are a company that 'cant fail' and get a free pass from the Federal Government as they file bankruptcy and wash it all away.
just like Chrysler did when they were absolved of their obligations to creditors after the filing ( short version - liquidation of their billions in assets was bypassed with agreement with the Feds and left people holding the bag, which normally would NOT happen in a bankruptcy like this.
Bond holders and creditors get first grab at the assets, not some foreign company waving cash ).Hey, its 'change', not following the law, right?
Pfft</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887</id>
	<title>Subject Line</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anyone else read the story title as <i>Cam<b>e</b>ra Goes On Offense Against the <b>M</b>PAA</i>?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else read the story title as Camera Goes On Offense Against the MPAA ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else read the story title as Camera Goes On Offense Against the MPAA?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282377</id>
	<title>Don't care</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1244659740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Once upon a time there were murderous thieves on the high seas.  The cure was to license the hunting of them, with the prize whatever spoils they had won.  Not the best system, bt it worked.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once upon a time there were murderous thieves on the high seas .
The cure was to license the hunting of them , with the prize whatever spoils they had won .
Not the best system , bt it worked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once upon a time there were murderous thieves on the high seas.
The cure was to license the hunting of them, with the prize whatever spoils they had won.
Not the best system, bt it worked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281645</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>d'fim</author>
	<datestamp>1244656860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?"</i>
<br>
<br>
Not often enough to offset all the times he has given me 2-hour tasks and expected results inside of 2 minutes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off ?
" Not often enough to offset all the times he has given me 2-hour tasks and expected results inside of 2 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?
"


Not often enough to offset all the times he has given me 2-hour tasks and expected results inside of 2 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283155</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1244663040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Considering how the media companies love to just liscense their products to consumers, artists should work together to force the contracts to change so their work is merely liscensed to the labels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how the media companies love to just liscense their products to consumers , artists should work together to force the contracts to change so their work is merely liscensed to the labels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how the media companies love to just liscense their products to consumers, artists should work together to force the contracts to change so their work is merely liscensed to the labels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282793</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm.</title>
	<author>mattwarden</author>
	<datestamp>1244661420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Still, its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this<br>&gt; high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start.</p><p>(Human) Systems work only when people's interests are aligned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Still , its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this &gt; high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start .
( Human ) Systems work only when people 's interests are aligned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Still, its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this&gt; high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start.
(Human) Systems work only when people's interests are aligned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280707</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287331</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>chrismcb</author>
	<datestamp>1244639040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit. If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are,</p> </div><p>What would we call them? A bunch of greedy selfish bastards, who look after no interests but their own? And no I'm not talking about the RIAA or the music companies, but the thieves who steal the music.

The thing is EVERYONE here is greedy. The music company wants money, and people want to keep their money and get their music for free.
Meanwhile the poor starving artists just want to eat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use , full well knowing it 's illicit .
If we 're going to defend file sharing , let 's be honest and call things for what they are , What would we call them ?
A bunch of greedy selfish bastards , who look after no interests but their own ?
And no I 'm not talking about the RIAA or the music companies , but the thieves who steal the music .
The thing is EVERYONE here is greedy .
The music company wants money , and people want to keep their money and get their music for free .
Meanwhile the poor starving artists just want to eat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit.
If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, What would we call them?
A bunch of greedy selfish bastards, who look after no interests but their own?
And no I'm not talking about the RIAA or the music companies, but the thieves who steal the music.
The thing is EVERYONE here is greedy.
The music company wants money, and people want to keep their money and get their music for free.
Meanwhile the poor starving artists just want to eat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281075</id>
	<title>Kiwi Camara is a race troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244654700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In his first year at Harvard, Camara was involved in a racial controversy that would gain attention from the national media. Like many students, Camara posted his course outlines to a popular student-run website. Camara's, however, referred to blacks as nigs. For example, to summarize Shelley v. Kraemer, he wrote "Nigs buy land with no nig covenant; Q: Enforceable?"[7] The notes were prefaced with a disclaimer that they may contain racially offensive shorthand.[7]</p><p>Upon discovering the outline, a classmate alerted other students and professors.[7] Camara issued an apology and the outlines were promptly removed, whereupon a third student using the pseudonym "gcrocodile" e-mailed the classmate who discovered the outline expressing disappointment that they were no longer available and an intention to use the word nigger more often.[8]</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi\_Camara" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi\_Camara</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>He sounds like trouble in a box!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In his first year at Harvard , Camara was involved in a racial controversy that would gain attention from the national media .
Like many students , Camara posted his course outlines to a popular student-run website .
Camara 's , however , referred to blacks as nigs .
For example , to summarize Shelley v. Kraemer , he wrote " Nigs buy land with no nig covenant ; Q : Enforceable ?
" [ 7 ] The notes were prefaced with a disclaimer that they may contain racially offensive shorthand .
[ 7 ] Upon discovering the outline , a classmate alerted other students and professors .
[ 7 ] Camara issued an apology and the outlines were promptly removed , whereupon a third student using the pseudonym " gcrocodile " e-mailed the classmate who discovered the outline expressing disappointment that they were no longer available and an intention to use the word nigger more often .
[ 8 ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi \ _Camara [ wikipedia.org ] He sounds like trouble in a box !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In his first year at Harvard, Camara was involved in a racial controversy that would gain attention from the national media.
Like many students, Camara posted his course outlines to a popular student-run website.
Camara's, however, referred to blacks as nigs.
For example, to summarize Shelley v. Kraemer, he wrote "Nigs buy land with no nig covenant; Q: Enforceable?
"[7] The notes were prefaced with a disclaimer that they may contain racially offensive shorthand.
[7]Upon discovering the outline, a classmate alerted other students and professors.
[7] Camara issued an apology and the outlines were promptly removed, whereupon a third student using the pseudonym "gcrocodile" e-mailed the classmate who discovered the outline expressing disappointment that they were no longer available and an intention to use the word nigger more often.
[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi\_Camara [wikipedia.org]He sounds like trouble in a box!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287025</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Scroatzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1244636640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pardon me, but at the risk of losing my geek cred, I was just wondering how many sides a "religon" has? I Binged it, and couldn't seem to find the answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pardon me , but at the risk of losing my geek cred , I was just wondering how many sides a " religon " has ?
I Binged it , and could n't seem to find the answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pardon me, but at the risk of losing my geek cred, I was just wondering how many sides a "religon" has?
I Binged it, and couldn't seem to find the answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282257</id>
	<title>This is a bad idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244659320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Camara went on offense against the RIAA, I got charged with Hit-and-run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Camara went on offense against the RIAA , I got charged with Hit-and-run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Camara went on offense against the RIAA, I got charged with Hit-and-run.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287345</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>chrismcb</author>
	<datestamp>1244639100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is file-sharing even close to being fair use?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is file-sharing even close to being fair use ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is file-sharing even close to being fair use?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280689</id>
	<title>waiting for my official interpretation...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NYCountyLawyer, what is your take on this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NYCountyLawyer , what is your take on this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NYCountyLawyer, what is your take on this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281275</id>
	<title>Re:Subject Line</title>
	<author>n30na</author>
	<datestamp>1244655480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>might as well be *AA anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>might as well be * AA anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>might as well be *AA anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282807</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244661480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Failing to challenge RIAA is what enables their current behavior.  Losing may not be much worse than the "rights" they already assume.  Although I admit the time and place for this battle needs to be chosen carefully, I have seen nothing to indicate a lack confidence in the strategy or the players..  It's Game Day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Failing to challenge RIAA is what enables their current behavior .
Losing may not be much worse than the " rights " they already assume .
Although I admit the time and place for this battle needs to be chosen carefully , I have seen nothing to indicate a lack confidence in the strategy or the players.. It 's Game Day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Failing to challenge RIAA is what enables their current behavior.
Losing may not be much worse than the "rights" they already assume.
Although I admit the time and place for this battle needs to be chosen carefully, I have seen nothing to indicate a lack confidence in the strategy or the players..  It's Game Day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287039</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Whuffo</author>
	<datestamp>1244636700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you'd find that under the current copyright laws, creations of artists who are under contract to a record company are considered "works for hire" and the record company owns the copyrights automatically.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 'd find that under the current copyright laws , creations of artists who are under contract to a record company are considered " works for hire " and the record company owns the copyrights automatically .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you'd find that under the current copyright laws, creations of artists who are under contract to a record company are considered "works for hire" and the record company owns the copyrights automatically.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282483</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Rasperin</author>
	<datestamp>1244660160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to be safe, IANAL all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to be safe , IANAL all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to be safe, IANAL all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281319</id>
	<title>Re:Subject Line</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244655660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Did anyone else read the story title as <i>Cam<b>e</b>ra Goes On Offense Against the <b>M</b>PAA</i>?</p></div><p>You may need to clean your eyes/contacts/glasses/monitor or anything else used in sight of a subject line.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone else read the story title as Camera Goes On Offense Against the MPAA ? You may need to clean your eyes/contacts/glasses/monitor or anything else used in sight of a subject line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone else read the story title as Camera Goes On Offense Against the MPAA?You may need to clean your eyes/contacts/glasses/monitor or anything else used in sight of a subject line.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281841</id>
	<title>Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie</title>
	<author>number11</author>
	<datestamp>1244657640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon? </i></p><p>So long as he hits the moon, it's a win both ways.  He's going to try hard, because a high-profile loss isn't going to do his name any good.</p><p><i>old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour. And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.</i></p><p>The RIAA seem to be more the equivalent of a mugger armed with a rock.  Intimidating if you're alone and unarmed, but less so if you're with a friend who's carrying a crowbar or, better yet, a Glock.  It's worked because most of their victims were alone and unarmed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does young " Kiwi " there really have your best interests at heart , or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon ?
So long as he hits the moon , it 's a win both ways .
He 's going to try hard , because a high-profile loss is n't going to do his name any good.old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour .
And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.The RIAA seem to be more the equivalent of a mugger armed with a rock .
Intimidating if you 're alone and unarmed , but less so if you 're with a friend who 's carrying a crowbar or , better yet , a Glock .
It 's worked because most of their victims were alone and unarmed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?
So long as he hits the moon, it's a win both ways.
He's going to try hard, because a high-profile loss isn't going to do his name any good.old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour.
And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.The RIAA seem to be more the equivalent of a mugger armed with a rock.
Intimidating if you're alone and unarmed, but less so if you're with a friend who's carrying a crowbar or, better yet, a Glock.
It's worked because most of their victims were alone and unarmed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</id>
	<title>Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is a hell of a name for a lawyer.</p><p>"Meet Kiwi Camara. He's a high-powered defense attorney by day... and <i>she's</i> a pole-riding stripper by night! What will happen when these two lives collide? Find out this Fall on Barely Legal, only on Fox!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is a hell of a name for a lawyer .
" Meet Kiwi Camara .
He 's a high-powered defense attorney by day... and she 's a pole-riding stripper by night !
What will happen when these two lives collide ?
Find out this Fall on Barely Legal , only on Fox !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is a hell of a name for a lawyer.
"Meet Kiwi Camara.
He's a high-powered defense attorney by day... and she's a pole-riding stripper by night!
What will happen when these two lives collide?
Find out this Fall on Barely Legal, only on Fox!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>wytcld</author>
	<datestamp>1244655780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>She's "obviously guilty" only <i>if</i> file-sharing is not fair use. And she's "obviously guilty" only if the RIAA truly owns those copyrights. If the copyrights were, in effect, extorted from the artists, falsely filed, then the RIAA is representing an industry who's claim of ownership is fraudulent.</p><p>This does not, by the way, under current US law, cheat the artists. You <i>by default</i> own copyright in your creative work, even without filing. Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would, under our law, enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names. This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them, from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.</p><p><i>That</i> would be a great boon for musicians. If file sharing is <i>not</i> fair use, but the copyrights properly belong to the creative artists rather than the recording companies, then it would be up to the artists to form a cooperative to claim money from file sharers. However, in this case it may well turn out that (1) file sharers are more willing to pay directly to the artists they love, and (2) artists are more willing to be generous to the fans who love them.</p><p>This ends up good all the way around. The file sharers, in defending themselves from the RIAA, can make the greatest gift back to the artists themselves - the true ownership of their own works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>She 's " obviously guilty " only if file-sharing is not fair use .
And she 's " obviously guilty " only if the RIAA truly owns those copyrights .
If the copyrights were , in effect , extorted from the artists , falsely filed , then the RIAA is representing an industry who 's claim of ownership is fraudulent.This does not , by the way , under current US law , cheat the artists .
You by default own copyright in your creative work , even without filing .
Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would , under our law , enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names .
This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them , from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.That would be a great boon for musicians .
If file sharing is not fair use , but the copyrights properly belong to the creative artists rather than the recording companies , then it would be up to the artists to form a cooperative to claim money from file sharers .
However , in this case it may well turn out that ( 1 ) file sharers are more willing to pay directly to the artists they love , and ( 2 ) artists are more willing to be generous to the fans who love them.This ends up good all the way around .
The file sharers , in defending themselves from the RIAA , can make the greatest gift back to the artists themselves - the true ownership of their own works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She's "obviously guilty" only if file-sharing is not fair use.
And she's "obviously guilty" only if the RIAA truly owns those copyrights.
If the copyrights were, in effect, extorted from the artists, falsely filed, then the RIAA is representing an industry who's claim of ownership is fraudulent.This does not, by the way, under current US law, cheat the artists.
You by default own copyright in your creative work, even without filing.
Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would, under our law, enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names.
This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them, from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.That would be a great boon for musicians.
If file sharing is not fair use, but the copyrights properly belong to the creative artists rather than the recording companies, then it would be up to the artists to form a cooperative to claim money from file sharers.
However, in this case it may well turn out that (1) file sharers are more willing to pay directly to the artists they love, and (2) artists are more willing to be generous to the fans who love them.This ends up good all the way around.
The file sharers, in defending themselves from the RIAA, can make the greatest gift back to the artists themselves - the true ownership of their own works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280499</id>
	<title>All I gotta say is...</title>
	<author>Praedon</author>
	<datestamp>1244652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's about time.. Though it does seem like a lick and a prayer, it may open some eyes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about time.. Though it does seem like a lick and a prayer , it may open some eyes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about time.. Though it does seem like a lick and a prayer, it may open some eyes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282711</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>BForrester</author>
	<datestamp>1244661060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...which in turn balances out against the amount of time managers are paid for doing hell knows what.</p><p>Or take Scott Adam's word for it:<br><a href="http://www.dilbert.com/2009-06-09/" title="dilbert.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dilbert.com/2009-06-09/</a> [dilbert.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...which in turn balances out against the amount of time managers are paid for doing hell knows what.Or take Scott Adam 's word for it : http : //www.dilbert.com/2009-06-09/ [ dilbert.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...which in turn balances out against the amount of time managers are paid for doing hell knows what.Or take Scott Adam's word for it:http://www.dilbert.com/2009-06-09/ [dilbert.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289471</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personally, I'd like to see a number of RIAA lawyers go up against a Camaro.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally , I 'd like to see a number of RIAA lawyers go up against a Camaro .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally, I'd like to see a number of RIAA lawyers go up against a Camaro.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286487</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244633520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would, under our law, enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names. This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them, from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.</p></div><p>Didn't these artists accept money from the record companies in exchange for the rights to the music? At some point you have to start blaming the artists for continuing to go for the quick money.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would , under our law , enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names .
This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them , from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.Did n't these artists accept money from the record companies in exchange for the rights to the music ?
At some point you have to start blaming the artists for continuing to go for the quick money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would, under our law, enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names.
This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them, from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.Didn't these artists accept money from the record companies in exchange for the rights to the music?
At some point you have to start blaming the artists for continuing to go for the quick money.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282161</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1244658840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed. What is also important is exposing the fact that RIAA does not really protect artists' profit but has built litigation into their business model instead with the intention to maximize their own profit. And as they are doing litigation as a business practice, they are doing everything possible to make it a streamlined, efficient, automated process by going around the laws binding the current judicial system.</p><p>And let's not forget that the judicial system costs a lot of taxpayer money. One entity putting a lot of load on said system costs us a lot of dollars which is one more way RIAA robs the public domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
What is also important is exposing the fact that RIAA does not really protect artists ' profit but has built litigation into their business model instead with the intention to maximize their own profit .
And as they are doing litigation as a business practice , they are doing everything possible to make it a streamlined , efficient , automated process by going around the laws binding the current judicial system.And let 's not forget that the judicial system costs a lot of taxpayer money .
One entity putting a lot of load on said system costs us a lot of dollars which is one more way RIAA robs the public domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
What is also important is exposing the fact that RIAA does not really protect artists' profit but has built litigation into their business model instead with the intention to maximize their own profit.
And as they are doing litigation as a business practice, they are doing everything possible to make it a streamlined, efficient, automated process by going around the laws binding the current judicial system.And let's not forget that the judicial system costs a lot of taxpayer money.
One entity putting a lot of load on said system costs us a lot of dollars which is one more way RIAA robs the public domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280815</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1244653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+1 Internets.  Would be more, but you came in as AC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 1 Internets .
Would be more , but you came in as AC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+1 Internets.
Would be more, but you came in as AC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281283</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1244655480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When people say "the RIAA" they usually mean "the record company in question at the direction of the RIAA." The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAA nor have the checks been written to "the RIAA" - they are filed by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_RIAA\_member\_labels" title="wikipedia.org">the member companies (EMI, Sony, Universal, and Warner being the four biggest)</a> [wikipedia.org]. Thus, there won't be any "close up shop to avoid paying the money back."</htmltext>
<tokenext>When people say " the RIAA " they usually mean " the record company in question at the direction of the RIAA .
" The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAA nor have the checks been written to " the RIAA " - they are filed by the member companies ( EMI , Sony , Universal , and Warner being the four biggest ) [ wikipedia.org ] .
Thus , there wo n't be any " close up shop to avoid paying the money back .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When people say "the RIAA" they usually mean "the record company in question at the direction of the RIAA.
" The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAA nor have the checks been written to "the RIAA" - they are filed by the member companies (EMI, Sony, Universal, and Warner being the four biggest) [wikipedia.org].
Thus, there won't be any "close up shop to avoid paying the money back.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281337</id>
	<title>IANAL</title>
	<author>jockeys</author>
	<datestamp>1244655720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>but neither is Jack Thompson!
<br> <br>
Sorry, I'd been waiting a while for an excuse to say that in a slightly relevant way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but neither is Jack Thompson !
Sorry , I 'd been waiting a while for an excuse to say that in a slightly relevant way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but neither is Jack Thompson!
Sorry, I'd been waiting a while for an excuse to say that in a slightly relevant way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284517</id>
	<title>Re:A taste of their own medicine</title>
	<author>dogeatery</author>
	<datestamp>1244625240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a deserved change from the candy they're always eating.  They just love its sweet taste</p><p>/Obligatory bad Simpsons reference</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a deserved change from the candy they 're always eating .
They just love its sweet taste/Obligatory bad Simpsons reference</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a deserved change from the candy they're always eating.
They just love its sweet taste/Obligatory bad Simpsons reference</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281643</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Asshole.  I looked up the name because of your post, but it's a dude.  Asshole.
</p><p>
But, yeah, the show sounds good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Asshole .
I looked up the name because of your post , but it 's a dude .
Asshole . But , yeah , the show sounds good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Asshole.
I looked up the name because of your post, but it's a dude.
Asshole.

But, yeah, the show sounds good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283813</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244665740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it? Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit. If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts. The RIAA may resort to reality distortion, but that doesn't mean we should.</p></div><p>Indeed. Let us be honest. Fair-use, ever heard of it?</p><p>"Lost profits" cannot exist when I would not have bought the product in the first place, and am downloading rather than listening to the radio as my means of musical discovery. If I can't discover it I will not be purchasing it. Stop the slander already.</p><p>File sharing is the new radio, adapt or die.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well that would be kind of dishonest , would n't it ?
Your average file-sharing culprit is n't an innocent old grandpa , but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use , full well knowing it 's illicit .
If we 're going to defend file sharing , let 's be honest and call things for what they are , and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts .
The RIAA may resort to reality distortion , but that does n't mean we should.Indeed .
Let us be honest .
Fair-use , ever heard of it ?
" Lost profits " can not exist when I would not have bought the product in the first place , and am downloading rather than listening to the radio as my means of musical discovery .
If I ca n't discover it I will not be purchasing it .
Stop the slander already.File sharing is the new radio , adapt or die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it?
Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit.
If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts.
The RIAA may resort to reality distortion, but that doesn't mean we should.Indeed.
Let us be honest.
Fair-use, ever heard of it?
"Lost profits" cannot exist when I would not have bought the product in the first place, and am downloading rather than listening to the radio as my means of musical discovery.
If I can't discover it I will not be purchasing it.
Stop the slander already.File sharing is the new radio, adapt or die.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28301009</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244717460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have obviously never had a lawyer do work for you, your family, or your loved ones and actually have some integrity while at it.</p><p>When you see a lawyer work with a 60 year old woman who lost her husband to cancer, and the husband didn't have a will... and the lawyer actually goes to fight this out to get the woman her home and property completely in her name, pro bono... you sort of change your mind.</p><p>This is after a completely different law firm told her everything was fine, all was good, and was lying through their teeth about that.<br>All the woman wanted to do was sell her property, so she could move somewhere a little nicer to live out the last few years of her life.</p><p>It wasn't an issue of deciphering the law, either. It was a matter of one man's ignorance of a law costing his significant other the security of knowing that whenever she wants to or needs to, she can do anything with the property that he and she have lived on for decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have obviously never had a lawyer do work for you , your family , or your loved ones and actually have some integrity while at it.When you see a lawyer work with a 60 year old woman who lost her husband to cancer , and the husband did n't have a will... and the lawyer actually goes to fight this out to get the woman her home and property completely in her name , pro bono... you sort of change your mind.This is after a completely different law firm told her everything was fine , all was good , and was lying through their teeth about that.All the woman wanted to do was sell her property , so she could move somewhere a little nicer to live out the last few years of her life.It was n't an issue of deciphering the law , either .
It was a matter of one man 's ignorance of a law costing his significant other the security of knowing that whenever she wants to or needs to , she can do anything with the property that he and she have lived on for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have obviously never had a lawyer do work for you, your family, or your loved ones and actually have some integrity while at it.When you see a lawyer work with a 60 year old woman who lost her husband to cancer, and the husband didn't have a will... and the lawyer actually goes to fight this out to get the woman her home and property completely in her name, pro bono... you sort of change your mind.This is after a completely different law firm told her everything was fine, all was good, and was lying through their teeth about that.All the woman wanted to do was sell her property, so she could move somewhere a little nicer to live out the last few years of her life.It wasn't an issue of deciphering the law, either.
It was a matter of one man's ignorance of a law costing his significant other the security of knowing that whenever she wants to or needs to, she can do anything with the property that he and she have lived on for decades.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282057</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289129</id>
	<title>Re:A taste of their own medicine</title>
	<author>shrikel</author>
	<datestamp>1244653260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, they probably can't just "back out of it", but if it really gets that bad for them, they can probably throw enough money at her to convince her to settle.  Better that (for them) than to get kicked out of the courtrooms completely.</p><p>Here's hoping she and her lawyers stick it to the RIAA instead of accepting a life of luxury on their tab.  But quite frankly<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I know which one most people would choose, and it's not the one that would be beneficial to the rest of society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , they probably ca n't just " back out of it " , but if it really gets that bad for them , they can probably throw enough money at her to convince her to settle .
Better that ( for them ) than to get kicked out of the courtrooms completely.Here 's hoping she and her lawyers stick it to the RIAA instead of accepting a life of luxury on their tab .
But quite frankly ... I know which one most people would choose , and it 's not the one that would be beneficial to the rest of society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, they probably can't just "back out of it", but if it really gets that bad for them, they can probably throw enough money at her to convince her to settle.
Better that (for them) than to get kicked out of the courtrooms completely.Here's hoping she and her lawyers stick it to the RIAA instead of accepting a life of luxury on their tab.
But quite frankly ... I know which one most people would choose, and it's not the one that would be beneficial to the rest of society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292281</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Custard Horse</author>
	<datestamp>1244729880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work in the legal profession and my ex boss acted for a pair of rogue plumbers who used to get calls for blocked piped and charge thousands to dig up the garden due to 'root ingress' in submerged outlet piping.  They knew all the tricks and were guilty as sin.<br><br>Imagine if you were a vulnerable elderly person with water flooding into your house and a couple of 'friendly' plumbers tell you they can stop the flood or leave you to it.  There doesn't seem to be much of a choice does there?<br><br>It's all very well making swathing disingenuous comments about lawyers but there is a high bar (no pun intended) to cross before you can hold yourself out as a lawyer and being an officer of the court is a position that most take seriously.<br><br>As for the plumbers, they were ordered to pay damages.  Why did my boss act for them?  Because they said they were innocent which is reason enough to accept and act upon the instructions.  If lawyers pre-judge it interferes with the right to a defence which is not something any sane person would accept.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work in the legal profession and my ex boss acted for a pair of rogue plumbers who used to get calls for blocked piped and charge thousands to dig up the garden due to 'root ingress ' in submerged outlet piping .
They knew all the tricks and were guilty as sin.Imagine if you were a vulnerable elderly person with water flooding into your house and a couple of 'friendly ' plumbers tell you they can stop the flood or leave you to it .
There does n't seem to be much of a choice does there ? It 's all very well making swathing disingenuous comments about lawyers but there is a high bar ( no pun intended ) to cross before you can hold yourself out as a lawyer and being an officer of the court is a position that most take seriously.As for the plumbers , they were ordered to pay damages .
Why did my boss act for them ?
Because they said they were innocent which is reason enough to accept and act upon the instructions .
If lawyers pre-judge it interferes with the right to a defence which is not something any sane person would accept .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work in the legal profession and my ex boss acted for a pair of rogue plumbers who used to get calls for blocked piped and charge thousands to dig up the garden due to 'root ingress' in submerged outlet piping.
They knew all the tricks and were guilty as sin.Imagine if you were a vulnerable elderly person with water flooding into your house and a couple of 'friendly' plumbers tell you they can stop the flood or leave you to it.
There doesn't seem to be much of a choice does there?It's all very well making swathing disingenuous comments about lawyers but there is a high bar (no pun intended) to cross before you can hold yourself out as a lawyer and being an officer of the court is a position that most take seriously.As for the plumbers, they were ordered to pay damages.
Why did my boss act for them?
Because they said they were innocent which is reason enough to accept and act upon the instructions.
If lawyers pre-judge it interferes with the right to a defence which is not something any sane person would accept.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281185</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Gnissem</author>
	<datestamp>1244655120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not as good a name as Su Yu... <a href="http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2875035\_1" title="findlaw.com" rel="nofollow">http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2875035\_1</a> [findlaw.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not as good a name as Su Yu... http : //pview.findlaw.com/view/2875035 \ _1 [ findlaw.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not as good a name as Su Yu... http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2875035\_1 [findlaw.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</id>
	<title>Wow!!!</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1244653620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.</p><p>And what would that mean with regards to the MPAA or BSA?  They both, quite often, use similar tactics and means of evidence collection.</p><p>This will undoubtedly stir up a hornets nest on a scale we have never seen before.  If this guy actually manages to win his cases and motions, it will likely result in new laws being introduced that would effectively make the RIAA's activities legal... that is unless some people are there to stop it which isn't likely considering the way laws like the DMCA are passed... subversively and practically secretly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK , the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently , probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.And what would that mean with regards to the MPAA or BSA ?
They both , quite often , use similar tactics and means of evidence collection.This will undoubtedly stir up a hornets nest on a scale we have never seen before .
If this guy actually manages to win his cases and motions , it will likely result in new laws being introduced that would effectively make the RIAA 's activities legal... that is unless some people are there to stop it which is n't likely considering the way laws like the DMCA are passed... subversively and practically secretly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.And what would that mean with regards to the MPAA or BSA?
They both, quite often, use similar tactics and means of evidence collection.This will undoubtedly stir up a hornets nest on a scale we have never seen before.
If this guy actually manages to win his cases and motions, it will likely result in new laws being introduced that would effectively make the RIAA's activities legal... that is unless some people are there to stop it which isn't likely considering the way laws like the DMCA are passed... subversively and practically secretly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</id>
	<title>Dangerous</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1244654520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This stunt is dangerous. This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.</p><p>Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA. This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.</p><p>I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands. He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way. If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny. If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.</p><p>Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.</p><p>I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom.</p><p>Yeah I said it. Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This stunt is dangerous .
This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win .
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA .
This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.I am not amused at this , it 's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use , by putting the case in his hands .
He has noting to lose in this , he 'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way .
If he wins , great a blow to intellectual tyranny .
If he loses , the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties , who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there , sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.I 'm not a fan of gambling with people 's freedom.Yeah I said it .
Mod me whatever , but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she 's pretty spooked too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This stunt is dangerous.
This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA.
This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands.
He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way.
If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny.
If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom.Yeah I said it.
Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283297</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1244663760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial.</p></div><p>I don't think that copyright violation is a good thing, but the insane damages clearly put it into the "unjust law" category.  Being guilty of breaking an unjust law doesn't make you a bad person.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But on the other hand , I wish this was a case where the defendant was n't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial.I do n't think that copyright violation is a good thing , but the insane damages clearly put it into the " unjust law " category .
Being guilty of breaking an unjust law does n't make you a bad person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial.I don't think that copyright violation is a good thing, but the insane damages clearly put it into the "unjust law" category.
Being guilty of breaking an unjust law doesn't make you a bad person.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281853</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1244657700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>paralegal. I throw the L on the end because people can't for the life of them guess the P alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>paralegal .
I throw the L on the end because people ca n't for the life of them guess the P alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>paralegal.
I throw the L on the end because people can't for the life of them guess the P alone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497</id>
	<title>More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1244652540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think this is the equivalent of the breakaway in the third period last night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this is the equivalent of the breakaway in the third period last night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this is the equivalent of the breakaway in the third period last night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288637</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1244648640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My solution to this is that one of the first things I discuss with a new boss is the reality of IT estimates. You can get a honest estimate from me, but be prepared that it won't hold. I will tell you in advance if I can't keep it, but it may happen. If you can't live with this, I will pad it and often surprise you with delivery WAY before the agreed time.</p><p>You can have it either way. I am willing to be honest with you, if you are willing not to hold it against me.</p><p>It may surprise you, but most are quite able to accept this and work with a honest estimate. They will probably expect a call an hour before deadline (and usually also get it) to give them an idea whether or not it will hold, but they're also able to deal with a "sorry, complications, need X hours more".</p><p>Of course, your estimate should be usually right. Else you don't give an estimate, you give a wild guess. The average boss may be a computer illiterate, but he's not stupid. If you constantly overestimate and deliver in half the time, it's worse for you. First, he will assume you're unable to make sensible predictions how long a given task takes you (pretty much telling you are not experienced in it), and he will generally assume that you overestimate and will eventually assume you're done in half the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My solution to this is that one of the first things I discuss with a new boss is the reality of IT estimates .
You can get a honest estimate from me , but be prepared that it wo n't hold .
I will tell you in advance if I ca n't keep it , but it may happen .
If you ca n't live with this , I will pad it and often surprise you with delivery WAY before the agreed time.You can have it either way .
I am willing to be honest with you , if you are willing not to hold it against me.It may surprise you , but most are quite able to accept this and work with a honest estimate .
They will probably expect a call an hour before deadline ( and usually also get it ) to give them an idea whether or not it will hold , but they 're also able to deal with a " sorry , complications , need X hours more " .Of course , your estimate should be usually right .
Else you do n't give an estimate , you give a wild guess .
The average boss may be a computer illiterate , but he 's not stupid .
If you constantly overestimate and deliver in half the time , it 's worse for you .
First , he will assume you 're unable to make sensible predictions how long a given task takes you ( pretty much telling you are not experienced in it ) , and he will generally assume that you overestimate and will eventually assume you 're done in half the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My solution to this is that one of the first things I discuss with a new boss is the reality of IT estimates.
You can get a honest estimate from me, but be prepared that it won't hold.
I will tell you in advance if I can't keep it, but it may happen.
If you can't live with this, I will pad it and often surprise you with delivery WAY before the agreed time.You can have it either way.
I am willing to be honest with you, if you are willing not to hold it against me.It may surprise you, but most are quite able to accept this and work with a honest estimate.
They will probably expect a call an hour before deadline (and usually also get it) to give them an idea whether or not it will hold, but they're also able to deal with a "sorry, complications, need X hours more".Of course, your estimate should be usually right.
Else you don't give an estimate, you give a wild guess.
The average boss may be a computer illiterate, but he's not stupid.
If you constantly overestimate and deliver in half the time, it's worse for you.
First, he will assume you're unable to make sensible predictions how long a given task takes you (pretty much telling you are not experienced in it), and he will generally assume that you overestimate and will eventually assume you're done in half the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281905</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is Slashdot. <b>Anything</b> is more exciting than sports.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Slashdot .
Anything is more exciting than sports .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Slashdot.
Anything is more exciting than sports.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282619</id>
	<title>Wacky names...</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1244660760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell is going on with all the wacky names here?  </p><p>A defendant called "Jammie," with a lawyer named "Kiwi" who studied under a guy named "Billion Dollar Charlie..."</p><p>They should copyright their names and then charge the RIAA to use them in legal documents.  </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell is going on with all the wacky names here ?
A defendant called " Jammie , " with a lawyer named " Kiwi " who studied under a guy named " Billion Dollar Charlie... " They should copyright their names and then charge the RIAA to use them in legal documents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell is going on with all the wacky names here?
A defendant called "Jammie," with a lawyer named "Kiwi" who studied under a guy named "Billion Dollar Charlie..."They should copyright their names and then charge the RIAA to use them in legal documents.  </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281797</id>
	<title>This kind of reminds me of the Soviets.</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1244657460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember when they used to have those parades of military hardware in Red Square?  They didn't just do that to whip up domestic national pride.  The parades were also an instrument of foreign policy.   They reminded the West that it didn't really want a shooting war with the Soviet Union.  The Soviets didn't want a shooting war with the West either. Everyone made sure everyone else knew that that was on the decision tree somewhere.</p><p>Litigation seems to be a little like that. Lawyers always prefer to settle, but first they have to put their arsenal on parade.  Even that ridiculous cannon that fires marshmallows. Sometimes that sort of thing can cause more grief than you'd expect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember when they used to have those parades of military hardware in Red Square ?
They did n't just do that to whip up domestic national pride .
The parades were also an instrument of foreign policy .
They reminded the West that it did n't really want a shooting war with the Soviet Union .
The Soviets did n't want a shooting war with the West either .
Everyone made sure everyone else knew that that was on the decision tree somewhere.Litigation seems to be a little like that .
Lawyers always prefer to settle , but first they have to put their arsenal on parade .
Even that ridiculous cannon that fires marshmallows .
Sometimes that sort of thing can cause more grief than you 'd expect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember when they used to have those parades of military hardware in Red Square?
They didn't just do that to whip up domestic national pride.
The parades were also an instrument of foreign policy.
They reminded the West that it didn't really want a shooting war with the Soviet Union.
The Soviets didn't want a shooting war with the West either.
Everyone made sure everyone else knew that that was on the decision tree somewhere.Litigation seems to be a little like that.
Lawyers always prefer to settle, but first they have to put their arsenal on parade.
Even that ridiculous cannon that fires marshmallows.
Sometimes that sort of thing can cause more grief than you'd expect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541</id>
	<title>A taste of their own medicine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244652720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>... and a lawsuit they can't just back out of when they realize they're not going to win. It's two great tastes brought together into a cocktail of bitter irony for the RIAA!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and a lawsuit they ca n't just back out of when they realize they 're not going to win .
It 's two great tastes brought together into a cocktail of bitter irony for the RIAA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and a lawsuit they can't just back out of when they realize they're not going to win.
It's two great tastes brought together into a cocktail of bitter irony for the RIAA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833</id>
	<title>Two sides</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This case brings me very mixed feelings.  On the one hand, the RIAA (and to a lessor extent, the MPAA) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.</p><p>But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial.  It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer.  Its a  good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This case brings me very mixed feelings .
On the one hand , the RIAA ( and to a lessor extent , the MPAA ) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.But on the other hand , I wish this was a case where the defendant was n't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial .
It sucks that this is n't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who does n't even know hot to turn on a computer .
Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid , because otherwise I 'd find it much harder to root for her side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This case brings me very mixed feelings.
On the one hand, the RIAA (and to a lessor extent, the MPAA) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial.
It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer.
Its a  good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281141</id>
	<title>At last !</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1244654940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>goddammit. this was a long time coming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>goddammit .
this was a long time coming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>goddammit.
this was a long time coming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283563</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>NewYorkCountryLawyer</author>
	<datestamp>1244664780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This stunt is dangerous. This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.

Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA. This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.

I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands. He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way. If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny. If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.

Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.

I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom.

Yeah I said it. Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.</p></div><p>I wouldn't worry about it. This firm has shown that they are (a) enthusiastic, (b) tech-savvy, (c) smart, (d) principled, and (e) hard working. Sure they're young, but that's okay. Win, lose, or draw, only good can come out of their being in the case and giving the RIAA a run for its money. I wish every case was litigated with this much dedication and "attitude". The RIAA's lawyers are so accustomed to having a walk through the park on almost every case, that they are probably in shock at the moment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This stunt is dangerous .
This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win .
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny .
Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA .
This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high .
I am not amused at this , it 's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use , by putting the case in his hands .
He has noting to lose in this , he 'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way .
If he wins , great a blow to intellectual tyranny .
If he loses , the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open .
Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties , who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there , sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre .
I 'm not a fan of gambling with people 's freedom .
Yeah I said it .
Mod me whatever , but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she 's pretty spooked too.I would n't worry about it .
This firm has shown that they are ( a ) enthusiastic , ( b ) tech-savvy , ( c ) smart , ( d ) principled , and ( e ) hard working .
Sure they 're young , but that 's okay .
Win , lose , or draw , only good can come out of their being in the case and giving the RIAA a run for its money .
I wish every case was litigated with this much dedication and " attitude " .
The RIAA 's lawyers are so accustomed to having a walk through the park on almost every case , that they are probably in shock at the moment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This stunt is dangerous.
This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.
Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA.
This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.
I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands.
He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way.
If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny.
If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.
Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.
I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom.
Yeah I said it.
Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.I wouldn't worry about it.
This firm has shown that they are (a) enthusiastic, (b) tech-savvy, (c) smart, (d) principled, and (e) hard working.
Sure they're young, but that's okay.
Win, lose, or draw, only good can come out of their being in the case and giving the RIAA a run for its money.
I wish every case was litigated with this much dedication and "attitude".
The RIAA's lawyers are so accustomed to having a walk through the park on almost every case, that they are probably in shock at the moment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289867</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>Voltageaav</author>
	<datestamp>1244660400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let Father Lindstrom lead us in our worship at Joe Louis Cathedral on this holiest day of the year, Friday, June 12th.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let Father Lindstrom lead us in our worship at Joe Louis Cathedral on this holiest day of the year , Friday , June 12th .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let Father Lindstrom lead us in our worship at Joe Louis Cathedral on this holiest day of the year, Friday, June 12th.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281881</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>JoeMerchant</author>
	<datestamp>1244657820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.</p></div><p>I don't think they've collected enough from piracy judgements to sneeze at, let alone pay for their legal expenses, investigations, PR campaigns, and all the other anti-piracy measures they have taken.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK , the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently , probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.I do n't think they 've collected enough from piracy judgements to sneeze at , let alone pay for their legal expenses , investigations , PR campaigns , and all the other anti-piracy measures they have taken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.I don't think they've collected enough from piracy judgements to sneeze at, let alone pay for their legal expenses, investigations, PR campaigns, and all the other anti-piracy measures they have taken.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283307</id>
	<title>Re:A$$ kickin' time</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1244663820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having a client's best interest at heart is a good thing, so don't get me wrong with the following.</p><p>More important that the client's interest, is society's interest.  If the issue were ONLY whether Jammie had to pay for some songs, I'd say "Big deal - no story here."  If the issue ended with whether it might affect whether I can download music as a result of this case, again, I'd say "Big deal - I can do without."</p><p>The REAL issues here, involve a concerted effort by RIAA and it's lookalikes to perform social engineering, on a global scale, with no benefit to society.  In effect, the *IAA's want to sit in our living rooms, and watch for every instance of each of us using or enjoying any content to which they can lay any possible claim.  And, with every instance, they want to charge us.</p><p>Time honored law has been challenged and even overturned in decisions that favor the "rights holders".  Those same "rights holders" are spending billions world wide to expand the definitions of those rights, completely redefining what a copyright is.</p><p>Imagine a world in which your kindergarden daughter skips a rope in your yard with a half dozen freinds, singing a currently popular song.  You check your online banking, to find that you've been charged a dollar or ten dollars for the use of copyrighted material.</p><p>Preposterous, you say?  Look to the UK, the nation with more surveillance of it's population than any nation on earth.  Look at current UK law, which makes it illegal for a mechanic or a restaurant to play a radio which might be heard by it's customers, unless a special fee is paid to the extortionist "rights enforcement" agencies.</p><p>The real question here is, what do rights holders hold?  Do they hold all of us hostage?  Do they own us?</p><p>This particular case means little, in and of itself.  The important issue, is how the case applies to everyone, throughout the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a client 's best interest at heart is a good thing , so do n't get me wrong with the following.More important that the client 's interest , is society 's interest .
If the issue were ONLY whether Jammie had to pay for some songs , I 'd say " Big deal - no story here .
" If the issue ended with whether it might affect whether I can download music as a result of this case , again , I 'd say " Big deal - I can do without .
" The REAL issues here , involve a concerted effort by RIAA and it 's lookalikes to perform social engineering , on a global scale , with no benefit to society .
In effect , the * IAA 's want to sit in our living rooms , and watch for every instance of each of us using or enjoying any content to which they can lay any possible claim .
And , with every instance , they want to charge us.Time honored law has been challenged and even overturned in decisions that favor the " rights holders " .
Those same " rights holders " are spending billions world wide to expand the definitions of those rights , completely redefining what a copyright is.Imagine a world in which your kindergarden daughter skips a rope in your yard with a half dozen freinds , singing a currently popular song .
You check your online banking , to find that you 've been charged a dollar or ten dollars for the use of copyrighted material.Preposterous , you say ?
Look to the UK , the nation with more surveillance of it 's population than any nation on earth .
Look at current UK law , which makes it illegal for a mechanic or a restaurant to play a radio which might be heard by it 's customers , unless a special fee is paid to the extortionist " rights enforcement " agencies.The real question here is , what do rights holders hold ?
Do they hold all of us hostage ?
Do they own us ? This particular case means little , in and of itself .
The important issue , is how the case applies to everyone , throughout the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a client's best interest at heart is a good thing, so don't get me wrong with the following.More important that the client's interest, is society's interest.
If the issue were ONLY whether Jammie had to pay for some songs, I'd say "Big deal - no story here.
"  If the issue ended with whether it might affect whether I can download music as a result of this case, again, I'd say "Big deal - I can do without.
"The REAL issues here, involve a concerted effort by RIAA and it's lookalikes to perform social engineering, on a global scale, with no benefit to society.
In effect, the *IAA's want to sit in our living rooms, and watch for every instance of each of us using or enjoying any content to which they can lay any possible claim.
And, with every instance, they want to charge us.Time honored law has been challenged and even overturned in decisions that favor the "rights holders".
Those same "rights holders" are spending billions world wide to expand the definitions of those rights, completely redefining what a copyright is.Imagine a world in which your kindergarden daughter skips a rope in your yard with a half dozen freinds, singing a currently popular song.
You check your online banking, to find that you've been charged a dollar or ten dollars for the use of copyrighted material.Preposterous, you say?
Look to the UK, the nation with more surveillance of it's population than any nation on earth.
Look at current UK law, which makes it illegal for a mechanic or a restaurant to play a radio which might be heard by it's customers, unless a special fee is paid to the extortionist "rights enforcement" agencies.The real question here is, what do rights holders hold?
Do they hold all of us hostage?
Do they own us?This particular case means little, in and of itself.
The important issue, is how the case applies to everyone, throughout the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109</id>
	<title>Re:More exciting than the play offs</title>
	<author>jamstar7</author>
	<datestamp>1244654820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is Slashdot. Anything is more exciting than sports.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a <b>religon</b>.  And they'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.</p><p>
But I like the idea of RIAA getting a dose of its own medicine.  This day has been a long time coming, just like that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO\_v.\_IBM" title="wikipedia.org">other case</a> [wikipedia.org] we've been watching from the peanut gallery.  Almost makes you wish you could sell tickets &amp; popcorn at it.  It's gonna be a helluva show...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Slashdot .
Anything is more exciting than sports .
Except Redwings Hockey is n't a sport , it 's a religon .
And they 'll bring home the Cup on Friday night .
But I like the idea of RIAA getting a dose of its own medicine .
This day has been a long time coming , just like that other case [ wikipedia.org ] we 've been watching from the peanut gallery .
Almost makes you wish you could sell tickets &amp; popcorn at it .
It 's gon na be a helluva show.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Slashdot.
Anything is more exciting than sports.
Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a religon.
And they'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.
But I like the idea of RIAA getting a dose of its own medicine.
This day has been a long time coming, just like that other case [wikipedia.org] we've been watching from the peanut gallery.
Almost makes you wish you could sell tickets &amp; popcorn at it.
It's gonna be a helluva show...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281095</id>
	<title>reality check</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244654760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The RIAA can easily drop the one case and hold up the class action suit in court for years. Even if that suit does go in favor of the RIAA's victims they can still appeal and hold it up a few more years. And in the meantime they have plenty of other tools at their disposal: re-education campaigns, new legislation to file lawsuits under, working with ISP monopolies, to name a few. Just sayin'... don't go recycling those tin foil hats yet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The RIAA can easily drop the one case and hold up the class action suit in court for years .
Even if that suit does go in favor of the RIAA 's victims they can still appeal and hold it up a few more years .
And in the meantime they have plenty of other tools at their disposal : re-education campaigns , new legislation to file lawsuits under , working with ISP monopolies , to name a few .
Just sayin'... do n't go recycling those tin foil hats yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The RIAA can easily drop the one case and hold up the class action suit in court for years.
Even if that suit does go in favor of the RIAA's victims they can still appeal and hold it up a few more years.
And in the meantime they have plenty of other tools at their disposal: re-education campaigns, new legislation to file lawsuits under, working with ISP monopolies, to name a few.
Just sayin'... don't go recycling those tin foil hats yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281491</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I 100\% agree. A while back<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. had an article about how Kiwi was representing someone for free after that person got the boot from there old layer. Its great Kiwi is willing to do this for free but this kid lacks major experience. Experience the RIAA bought a lot of with there "war chest" funds. If this fails then the RIAA will then have 1 more legal precedence backing there claim.</p><p>Im just hoping it works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 100 \ % agree .
A while back / .
had an article about how Kiwi was representing someone for free after that person got the boot from there old layer .
Its great Kiwi is willing to do this for free but this kid lacks major experience .
Experience the RIAA bought a lot of with there " war chest " funds .
If this fails then the RIAA will then have 1 more legal precedence backing there claim.Im just hoping it works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I 100\% agree.
A while back /.
had an article about how Kiwi was representing someone for free after that person got the boot from there old layer.
Its great Kiwi is willing to do this for free but this kid lacks major experience.
Experience the RIAA bought a lot of with there "war chest" funds.
If this fails then the RIAA will then have 1 more legal precedence backing there claim.Im just hoping it works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282557</id>
	<title>Re:I have a stupid question</title>
	<author>JaneTheIgnorantSlut</author>
	<datestamp>1244660460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean like this:<p>
"When DNA evidence that may have been left by the perpetrator of a serious crime is collected and preserved, and a DNA profile of the person who left the evidence is established from it, but the person&#226;(TM)s identity is unknown, a grand jury or the prosecutor should be permitted to charge the person, as identified by the profile, with the crime by indictment or other instrument requiring a judicial probable cause determination."

<a href="http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/standards/dnaevidence.html#7.1" title="abanet.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/standards/dnaevidence.html#7.1</a> [abanet.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like this : " When DNA evidence that may have been left by the perpetrator of a serious crime is collected and preserved , and a DNA profile of the person who left the evidence is established from it , but the person   ( TM ) s identity is unknown , a grand jury or the prosecutor should be permitted to charge the person , as identified by the profile , with the crime by indictment or other instrument requiring a judicial probable cause determination .
" http : //www.abanet.org/crimjust/standards/dnaevidence.html # 7.1 [ abanet.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like this:
"When DNA evidence that may have been left by the perpetrator of a serious crime is collected and preserved, and a DNA profile of the person who left the evidence is established from it, but the personâ(TM)s identity is unknown, a grand jury or the prosecutor should be permitted to charge the person, as identified by the profile, with the crime by indictment or other instrument requiring a judicial probable cause determination.
"

http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/standards/dnaevidence.html#7.1 [abanet.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283223</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>Trojan35</author>
	<datestamp>1244663400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People aren't mad that the RIAA is going after copyright infringers, they're mad because the RIAA is doing it in a vigilante style with the punishment not fitting the crime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are n't mad that the RIAA is going after copyright infringers , they 're mad because the RIAA is doing it in a vigilante style with the punishment not fitting the crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People aren't mad that the RIAA is going after copyright infringers, they're mad because the RIAA is doing it in a vigilante style with the punishment not fitting the crime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280793</id>
	<title>Needs experienced analysis</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>We would all like to see the RIAA lose on all points brought up here, but how strong are these arguments, and are there known ways the RIAA could dodge them?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We would all like to see the RIAA lose on all points brought up here , but how strong are these arguments , and are there known ways the RIAA could dodge them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We would all like to see the RIAA lose on all points brought up here, but how strong are these arguments, and are there known ways the RIAA could dodge them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281535</id>
	<title>Re:Wow!!!</title>
	<author>david.emery</author>
	<datestamp>1244656500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.</p></div><p>The statement by the RIAA that they've lost money on this (see <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/riaa-responds.ars" title="arstechnica.com">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/riaa-responds.ars</a> [arstechnica.com] ) means that most of the money has probably moved out of RIAA and into the hands of the lawyers and MediaSentry.  One would hope that there would be some grounds to go after not just RIAA, but also their lawyers and MediaSentry, possibly under RICO-like recovery.  But IANAL, and maybe a lawyer can comment on if it's possible to recover the $$ from the lawyers if RIAA goes bankrupt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK , the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently , probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.The statement by the RIAA that they 've lost money on this ( see http : //arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/riaa-responds.ars [ arstechnica.com ] ) means that most of the money has probably moved out of RIAA and into the hands of the lawyers and MediaSentry .
One would hope that there would be some grounds to go after not just RIAA , but also their lawyers and MediaSentry , possibly under RICO-like recovery .
But IANAL , and maybe a lawyer can comment on if it 's possible to recover the $ $ from the lawyers if RIAA goes bankrupt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.The statement by the RIAA that they've lost money on this (see http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/riaa-responds.ars [arstechnica.com] ) means that most of the money has probably moved out of RIAA and into the hands of the lawyers and MediaSentry.
One would hope that there would be some grounds to go after not just RIAA, but also their lawyers and MediaSentry, possibly under RICO-like recovery.
But IANAL, and maybe a lawyer can comment on if it's possible to recover the $$ from the lawyers if RIAA goes bankrupt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244655960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>IANALBMWIAPL</p></div> </blockquote><p>I am not a lawyer but my wife is a paralegal?<br>I am not a lawyer but my wife is a property lawyer?<br>I am not a lawyer but my wife is a patent lawyer?<br>I am not a lawyer but my wife is a ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANALBMWIAPL I am not a lawyer but my wife is a paralegal ? I am not a lawyer but my wife is a property lawyer ? I am not a lawyer but my wife is a patent lawyer ? I am not a lawyer but my wife is a ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANALBMWIAPL I am not a lawyer but my wife is a paralegal?I am not a lawyer but my wife is a property lawyer?I am not a lawyer but my wife is a patent lawyer?I am not a lawyer but my wife is a ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284283</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>TheLuggage2008</author>
	<datestamp>1244624460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.</p></div><p>Has the MPAA taught you nothing?</p><ol> <li>Rudy Baylor successfully sued his client's insurance company for their illegal policies, a young lawyer with little experience trying the case of his life (The Rainmaker)</li>
<li>Erin Brockovich investigated lots of stuff until she learned things that made a California power company admit wrongdoing and pay out wads of cash</li>
<li>Vinny Gambini won his first ever trial, and that was a murder trial in front of a hostile judge...</li></ol><p>

With just a little Disney "can-do" attitude, this case is a lock for our scrappy little legal-eagle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.Has the MPAA taught you nothing ?
Rudy Baylor successfully sued his client 's insurance company for their illegal policies , a young lawyer with little experience trying the case of his life ( The Rainmaker ) Erin Brockovich investigated lots of stuff until she learned things that made a California power company admit wrongdoing and pay out wads of cash Vinny Gambini won his first ever trial , and that was a murder trial in front of a hostile judge.. . With just a little Disney " can-do " attitude , this case is a lock for our scrappy little legal-eagle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.Has the MPAA taught you nothing?
Rudy Baylor successfully sued his client's insurance company for their illegal policies, a young lawyer with little experience trying the case of his life (The Rainmaker)
Erin Brockovich investigated lots of stuff until she learned things that made a California power company admit wrongdoing and pay out wads of cash
Vinny Gambini won his first ever trial, and that was a murder trial in front of a hostile judge...

With just a little Disney "can-do" attitude, this case is a lock for our scrappy little legal-eagle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282057</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1244658360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lawyers aren't a profession imho they are a racket. I never think of lawyers as professionals, simply because they need not exist. Imho a long long time ago, a group of clever men sat down and decided they could extort money from the general public, if the general public could no longer decipher the laws.<br> <br>

It was posted before, and it saddens me to think anyone *needs* a lawyer, but the simple fact that lawyers exist should logically mean that ignorance of the law is a valid excuse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lawyers are n't a profession imho they are a racket .
I never think of lawyers as professionals , simply because they need not exist .
Imho a long long time ago , a group of clever men sat down and decided they could extort money from the general public , if the general public could no longer decipher the laws .
It was posted before , and it saddens me to think anyone * needs * a lawyer , but the simple fact that lawyers exist should logically mean that ignorance of the law is a valid excuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lawyers aren't a profession imho they are a racket.
I never think of lawyers as professionals, simply because they need not exist.
Imho a long long time ago, a group of clever men sat down and decided they could extort money from the general public, if the general public could no longer decipher the laws.
It was posted before, and it saddens me to think anyone *needs* a lawyer, but the simple fact that lawyers exist should logically mean that ignorance of the law is a valid excuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281549</id>
	<title>Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1244656560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, maybe having some ambitious young hot-shot looking to make his representation defend you isn't as good as being able to buy any kind of defense you might want,  but it sure beats going into a knife fight armed with a rubber chicken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , maybe having some ambitious young hot-shot looking to make his representation defend you is n't as good as being able to buy any kind of defense you might want , but it sure beats going into a knife fight armed with a rubber chicken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, maybe having some ambitious young hot-shot looking to make his representation defend you isn't as good as being able to buy any kind of defense you might want,  but it sure beats going into a knife fight armed with a rubber chicken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287459</id>
	<title>Re:Two sides</title>
	<author>GWBasic</author>
	<datestamp>1244639760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it? Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit.</p></div><p>The issue isn't a simple as that.  You can't sue someone for stealing a pack of gum, because the value of the pack of gum isn't close to the statue of limitations.  (Or whatever the minimum economic value is needed.)  The court will laugh at anyone who tried to sue over a pack of gum, even if the claim was made in small claims court.</p><p>The RIAA is doing the equivalent of suing someone for stealing a pack of gum that they claim is worth $100.  They're also claiming that it's not worth digging up video footage from their video cameras to prove that someone stole the $100 gum from their store.</p><p>Kinda silly to sue over petty crime, huh?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well that would be kind of dishonest , would n't it ?
Your average file-sharing culprit is n't an innocent old grandpa , but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use , full well knowing it 's illicit.The issue is n't a simple as that .
You ca n't sue someone for stealing a pack of gum , because the value of the pack of gum is n't close to the statue of limitations .
( Or whatever the minimum economic value is needed .
) The court will laugh at anyone who tried to sue over a pack of gum , even if the claim was made in small claims court.The RIAA is doing the equivalent of suing someone for stealing a pack of gum that they claim is worth $ 100 .
They 're also claiming that it 's not worth digging up video footage from their video cameras to prove that someone stole the $ 100 gum from their store.Kinda silly to sue over petty crime , huh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it?
Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit.The issue isn't a simple as that.
You can't sue someone for stealing a pack of gum, because the value of the pack of gum isn't close to the statue of limitations.
(Or whatever the minimum economic value is needed.
)  The court will laugh at anyone who tried to sue over a pack of gum, even if the claim was made in small claims court.The RIAA is doing the equivalent of suing someone for stealing a pack of gum that they claim is worth $100.
They're also claiming that it's not worth digging up video footage from their video cameras to prove that someone stole the $100 gum from their store.Kinda silly to sue over petty crime, huh?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292677</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1244731260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are not worried NYCL I sleep all that much more easy but I have seem in my life far too many "hot shots" of any field, even when paired with experts, screw up. I don't like the path this could take is all. I mean just looking when the wife was busting through her studies at Hamline I swear it gives me the chills on how appeals move around.</p><p>As far as attitude goes, how many judges have you found that appreciate "attitude"? That's what worries me.</p><p>And for your a-e I'd like to ask about (f) Disciplined? e.g. "they're not going to end up mouthing off to the judge"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are not worried NYCL I sleep all that much more easy but I have seem in my life far too many " hot shots " of any field , even when paired with experts , screw up .
I do n't like the path this could take is all .
I mean just looking when the wife was busting through her studies at Hamline I swear it gives me the chills on how appeals move around.As far as attitude goes , how many judges have you found that appreciate " attitude " ?
That 's what worries me.And for your a-e I 'd like to ask about ( f ) Disciplined ?
e.g. " they 're not going to end up mouthing off to the judge "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are not worried NYCL I sleep all that much more easy but I have seem in my life far too many "hot shots" of any field, even when paired with experts, screw up.
I don't like the path this could take is all.
I mean just looking when the wife was busting through her studies at Hamline I swear it gives me the chills on how appeals move around.As far as attitude goes, how many judges have you found that appreciate "attitude"?
That's what worries me.And for your a-e I'd like to ask about (f) Disciplined?
e.g. "they're not going to end up mouthing off to the judge"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283563</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284163</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1244667180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(I don't suppose you'll answer me, but I will write this post in the hope you'll at least read it)<br>Sometimes there are people that are so talented, so brilliant, that it doesn't matter that they have little experience. I read Camara's biography, and it has brilliance written all over. He's definitely a lateral thinker, someone who thinks outside the box. I wish your wife reads his biography, hopefully she can appreciate his talents at least as much as I did.</p><p>In 1905 Einstein, too, was a rookie, when he sat the scientific world on fire by publishing 4 papers, each one of them fundamental, each one of them changing the face of physics ever since. And the nice thing is, the scientific community acknowledged him, in spite of him being a nobody (at the time). I don't know if lawyers are as willing to acknowledge a colleague's brilliance as scientists (mostly) are. I guess not, because of the large amounts of money that circulates in the world of law practice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( I do n't suppose you 'll answer me , but I will write this post in the hope you 'll at least read it ) Sometimes there are people that are so talented , so brilliant , that it does n't matter that they have little experience .
I read Camara 's biography , and it has brilliance written all over .
He 's definitely a lateral thinker , someone who thinks outside the box .
I wish your wife reads his biography , hopefully she can appreciate his talents at least as much as I did.In 1905 Einstein , too , was a rookie , when he sat the scientific world on fire by publishing 4 papers , each one of them fundamental , each one of them changing the face of physics ever since .
And the nice thing is , the scientific community acknowledged him , in spite of him being a nobody ( at the time ) .
I do n't know if lawyers are as willing to acknowledge a colleague 's brilliance as scientists ( mostly ) are .
I guess not , because of the large amounts of money that circulates in the world of law practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(I don't suppose you'll answer me, but I will write this post in the hope you'll at least read it)Sometimes there are people that are so talented, so brilliant, that it doesn't matter that they have little experience.
I read Camara's biography, and it has brilliance written all over.
He's definitely a lateral thinker, someone who thinks outside the box.
I wish your wife reads his biography, hopefully she can appreciate his talents at least as much as I did.In 1905 Einstein, too, was a rookie, when he sat the scientific world on fire by publishing 4 papers, each one of them fundamental, each one of them changing the face of physics ever since.
And the nice thing is, the scientific community acknowledged him, in spite of him being a nobody (at the time).
I don't know if lawyers are as willing to acknowledge a colleague's brilliance as scientists (mostly) are.
I guess not, because of the large amounts of money that circulates in the world of law practice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797</id>
	<title>Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244653620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?

</p><p>It's good that <em>someone<em> is fighting this case, but old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour.  And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.</em></em></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does young " Kiwi " there really have your best interests at heart , or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon ?
It 's good that someone is fighting this case , but old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour .
And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?
It's good that someone is fighting this case, but old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour.
And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284977</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>An ominous Cow art</author>
	<datestamp>1244627040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... but my wife invented APL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... but my wife invented APL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... but my wife invented APL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282033</id>
	<title>Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1244658300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?</p></div><p>Yes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does young " Kiwi " there really have your best interests at heart , or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon ? Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?Yes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281675</id>
	<title>This stunt is dangerous.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244656980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.</i></p><p>This "Rookie" is teamed up with a Harvard law professor who's called the <a href="http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-8682055.html" title="encyclopedia.com">"Billion Dollar Charlie"</a> [encyclopedia.com] and has a 1998 movie, "<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120633/" title="imdb.com">A Civil Action</a> [imdb.com]", about a case of his about a toxic polluter.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win .
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.This " Rookie " is teamed up with a Harvard law professor who 's called the " Billion Dollar Charlie " [ encyclopedia.com ] and has a 1998 movie , " A Civil Action [ imdb.com ] " , about a case of his about a toxic polluter .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win.
The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.This "Rookie" is teamed up with a Harvard law professor who's called the "Billion Dollar Charlie" [encyclopedia.com] and has a 1998 movie, "A Civil Action [imdb.com]", about a case of his about a toxic polluter.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281905</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244657820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.</p><p>Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.</p></div><p>Very true.  I've seen some very bad stuff done by some of my own co-workers.  And I know a few mechanics I'll never go back to.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?</p></div><p>I usually over-estimate how long something is going to take...  And then pad that estimate...  But not because I want to slack off.  If you tell someone their server will be down for 2 hours they expect to be up and working in 121 minutes.  If anything goes wrong and slows down that process you're going to have some unhappy people on your hands.  If, however, you tell them it'll take 4 hours, and you get it back up and running after 2.5 hours, they'll be thrilled.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can say that about many professions , from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer ca n't even possibly have unless he 's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.Very true .
I 've seen some very bad stuff done by some of my own co-workers .
And I know a few mechanics I 'll never go back to.How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off ? I usually over-estimate how long something is going to take... And then pad that estimate... But not because I want to slack off .
If you tell someone their server will be down for 2 hours they expect to be up and working in 121 minutes .
If anything goes wrong and slows down that process you 're going to have some unhappy people on your hands .
If , however , you tell them it 'll take 4 hours , and you get it back up and running after 2.5 hours , they 'll be thrilled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.Very true.
I've seen some very bad stuff done by some of my own co-workers.
And I know a few mechanics I'll never go back to.How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?I usually over-estimate how long something is going to take...  And then pad that estimate...  But not because I want to slack off.
If you tell someone their server will be down for 2 hours they expect to be up and working in 121 minutes.
If anything goes wrong and slows down that process you're going to have some unhappy people on your hands.
If, however, you tell them it'll take 4 hours, and you get it back up and running after 2.5 hours, they'll be thrilled.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283549</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>Lorien\_the\_first\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1244664720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then consider the possibilities offered by this website: <a href="http://www.againstmonopoly.org/" title="againstmonopoly.org">http://www.againstmonopoly.org/</a> [againstmonopoly.org].

Enjoy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then consider the possibilities offered by this website : http : //www.againstmonopoly.org/ [ againstmonopoly.org ] .
Enjoy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then consider the possibilities offered by this website: http://www.againstmonopoly.org/ [againstmonopoly.org].
Enjoy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286129</id>
	<title>Re:Kiwi?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244631540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too bad it's on Fox, they'll cancel it for sure</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad it 's on Fox , they 'll cancel it for sure</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad it's on Fox, they'll cancel it for sure</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282859</id>
	<title>Re:lawyers.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1244661780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.</p><p>Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.</p> </div><p>It's true, but what makes lawyers different from mechanics or plumbers is the level of that power. A plumber can set you up for an extra couple of hundred bucks. A lawyer can set you up for an extra couple of hundred thousand, and some jailtime too. Hence abuse of that power should be treated much more seriously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can say that about many professions , from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer ca n't even possibly have unless he 's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power .
It 's true , but what makes lawyers different from mechanics or plumbers is the level of that power .
A plumber can set you up for an extra couple of hundred bucks .
A lawyer can set you up for an extra couple of hundred thousand , and some jailtime too .
Hence abuse of that power should be treated much more seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.
It's true, but what makes lawyers different from mechanics or plumbers is the level of that power.
A plumber can set you up for an extra couple of hundred bucks.
A lawyer can set you up for an extra couple of hundred thousand, and some jailtime too.
Hence abuse of that power should be treated much more seriously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283979</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>maidix</author>
	<datestamp>1244666520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your argument sounds vaguely reminiscent of the "we shouldn't even try to oppose anything he wants, because we might fail, and THEN what?!?!" argument that the Democrats used for 8 years to support, enable, and empower every single one of George W. Bush's policies. OK, so if we shouldn't use the legal system to oppose the RIAA, how should we do it? What method of opposing this insanity is so guaranteed in its success that we *shouldn't* be afraid of losing in the attempt?

I say, make the attempt. Otherwise, you see... the RIAA has won, and the story is already over. I find that most objectionable. It's one thing to try, and fail... it's another thing to enable the people working against you, just so that you can wind up on the "winning" side.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your argument sounds vaguely reminiscent of the " we should n't even try to oppose anything he wants , because we might fail , and THEN what ? ! ? !
" argument that the Democrats used for 8 years to support , enable , and empower every single one of George W. Bush 's policies .
OK , so if we should n't use the legal system to oppose the RIAA , how should we do it ?
What method of opposing this insanity is so guaranteed in its success that we * should n't * be afraid of losing in the attempt ?
I say , make the attempt .
Otherwise , you see... the RIAA has won , and the story is already over .
I find that most objectionable .
It 's one thing to try , and fail... it 's another thing to enable the people working against you , just so that you can wind up on the " winning " side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your argument sounds vaguely reminiscent of the "we shouldn't even try to oppose anything he wants, because we might fail, and THEN what?!?!
" argument that the Democrats used for 8 years to support, enable, and empower every single one of George W. Bush's policies.
OK, so if we shouldn't use the legal system to oppose the RIAA, how should we do it?
What method of opposing this insanity is so guaranteed in its success that we *shouldn't* be afraid of losing in the attempt?
I say, make the attempt.
Otherwise, you see... the RIAA has won, and the story is already over.
I find that most objectionable.
It's one thing to try, and fail... it's another thing to enable the people working against you, just so that you can wind up on the "winning" side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283465</id>
	<title>Re:Dangerous</title>
	<author>TheoMurpse</author>
	<datestamp>1244664360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA.</p></div></blockquote><p>Goddammit, district courts don't set binding precedent on <b>any court</b>! I keep hearing "precedent" get thrown around, but it doesn't work the way you think it works!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA.Goddammit , district courts do n't set binding precedent on any court !
I keep hearing " precedent " get thrown around , but it does n't work the way you think it works !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA.Goddammit, district courts don't set binding precedent on any court!
I keep hearing "precedent" get thrown around, but it doesn't work the way you think it works!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28285487</id>
	<title>Interesting thought.</title>
	<author>jskline</author>
	<datestamp>1244629320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess this is now where the litigators for the RIAA are beginning to think; Paybacks are hell. Especially since I'm sure that money has moved to offshore banks and other places where the government could not even find it, assuming it came down to some form of mini-anarchy regarding this litigation as a whole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess this is now where the litigators for the RIAA are beginning to think ; Paybacks are hell .
Especially since I 'm sure that money has moved to offshore banks and other places where the government could not even find it , assuming it came down to some form of mini-anarchy regarding this litigation as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess this is now where the litigators for the RIAA are beginning to think; Paybacks are hell.
Especially since I'm sure that money has moved to offshore banks and other places where the government could not even find it, assuming it came down to some form of mini-anarchy regarding this litigation as a whole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280845</id>
	<title>Is it Christmas already ?</title>
	<author>loutr</author>
	<datestamp>1244653800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First my country finally shows signs of sanity by rejecting the Hadopi law (by way of the Constitutional Council, which verifies that a law doesn't break the constitutional rules), and then this ? Time to start celebrating<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>First my country finally shows signs of sanity by rejecting the Hadopi law ( by way of the Constitutional Council , which verifies that a law does n't break the constitutional rules ) , and then this ?
Time to start celebrating : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First my country finally shows signs of sanity by rejecting the Hadopi law (by way of the Constitutional Council, which verifies that a law doesn't break the constitutional rules), and then this ?
Time to start celebrating :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283665</id>
	<title>The RIAA's ill fated motion to bar objections</title>
	<author>NewYorkCountryLawyer</author>
	<datestamp>1244665140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>By the way, I submitted <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/submission/1016103/RIAAs-Bid-to-Stop-Jammie-From-Objecting-Fails?art\_pos=12" title="slashdot.org">a proposed article</a> [slashdot.org] a few days ago -- which is still in the Firehose -- about the Judge denying the RIAA's motion to bar Jammie from objecting to the defects in their copyright registration documents. I guess the article is being rejected, although it was voted up to "orange" in the Firehose, so you might want to check it out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By the way , I submitted a proposed article [ slashdot.org ] a few days ago -- which is still in the Firehose -- about the Judge denying the RIAA 's motion to bar Jammie from objecting to the defects in their copyright registration documents .
I guess the article is being rejected , although it was voted up to " orange " in the Firehose , so you might want to check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the way, I submitted a proposed article [slashdot.org] a few days ago -- which is still in the Firehose -- about the Judge denying the RIAA's motion to bar Jammie from objecting to the defects in their copyright registration documents.
I guess the article is being rejected, although it was voted up to "orange" in the Firehose, so you might want to check it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281841
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282287
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281949
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283563
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28301009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283301
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283429
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287459
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281643
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28290445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284517
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282459
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282751
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283549
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281905
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284977
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283465
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_10_1515221_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282257
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289471
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281095
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281911
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281853
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281491
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283563
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283465
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281529
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281145
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282599
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287459
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282161
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283223
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283391
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283813
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286487
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287039
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283155
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282681
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284517
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281093
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280821
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281983
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28290445
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281303
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281905
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288637
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282711
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28292281
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282057
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28301009
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281645
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282859
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281515
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282519
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283301
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280497
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280857
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281109
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28289867
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28284893
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281857
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287025
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282377
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282033
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282793
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28287961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28286129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281275
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280793
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280499
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281205
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282679
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280875
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28282287
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281453
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28288221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28283355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28281535
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_10_1515221.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_10_1515221.28280559
</commentlist>
</conversation>
