<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_21_1839203</id>
	<title>Sothink Violated the FlashGot GPL and Stole Code</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1245610740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ShineTheLight sends in news of two Firefox plug-ins: <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/220">FlashGot</a>, the original, and <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6541">Sothink</a>, the GPL-violating come-lately. <i>"People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks. It is an exact copy of a previous version of FlashGot. This deception came to light when users reported to the FlashGot support forum that their software was not working right. Some digging led to the discovery that the older module that Sothink stole and used verbatim was overriding the more recent engine on the machines of those who had both installed and it was causing the issue. It has been <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show\_bug.cgi?id=499485">reported to AMO</a> and the <a href="http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&amp;t=1654&amp;p=6396#p6396">FlashGot developer is aware of it</a>. The Sothink people have completely ignored and been silent on the subject. This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences."</i> The three most recent <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6541#reviews">reviews of Sothink</a> point out this plug-in's dishonest nature. A number of earlier, one-line, 5-star reviews &mdash; expressed in a similar style &mdash; sound suspiciously like astroturfing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ShineTheLight sends in news of two Firefox plug-ins : FlashGot , the original , and Sothink , the GPL-violating come-lately .
" People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks .
It is an exact copy of a previous version of FlashGot .
This deception came to light when users reported to the FlashGot support forum that their software was not working right .
Some digging led to the discovery that the older module that Sothink stole and used verbatim was overriding the more recent engine on the machines of those who had both installed and it was causing the issue .
It has been reported to AMO and the FlashGot developer is aware of it .
The Sothink people have completely ignored and been silent on the subject .
This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work , pass it off as their own , never acknowledge or give credit , and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences .
" The three most recent reviews of Sothink point out this plug-in 's dishonest nature .
A number of earlier , one-line , 5-star reviews    expressed in a similar style    sound suspiciously like astroturfing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ShineTheLight sends in news of two Firefox plug-ins: FlashGot, the original, and Sothink, the GPL-violating come-lately.
"People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks.
It is an exact copy of a previous version of FlashGot.
This deception came to light when users reported to the FlashGot support forum that their software was not working right.
Some digging led to the discovery that the older module that Sothink stole and used verbatim was overriding the more recent engine on the machines of those who had both installed and it was causing the issue.
It has been reported to AMO and the FlashGot developer is aware of it.
The Sothink people have completely ignored and been silent on the subject.
This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.
" The three most recent reviews of Sothink point out this plug-in's dishonest nature.
A number of earlier, one-line, 5-star reviews — expressed in a similar style — sound suspiciously like astroturfing.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414547</id>
	<title>Re:And how is th different from the RIAA and MPAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245586980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For fuck's sake, Slashdotters.</p><p>steal<br>verb<br>[ trans. ] take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it : thieves stole her bicycle | [ intrans. ] she was found guilty of stealing from her employers | [as adj. ] ( stolen) stolen goods.</p><p><b>dishonestly pass off (another person's ideas) as one's own</b> : accusations that one group had stolen ideas from the other were soon flying.<br>.<br>.</p><p>There's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sure<br>And you know sometimes words have two meanings<br>In the tree by the brook there's a songbird who sings<br>Sometimes all of our thoughts are mis-given</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For fuck 's sake , Slashdotters.stealverb [ trans .
] take ( another person 's property ) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it : thieves stole her bicycle | [ intrans .
] she was found guilty of stealing from her employers | [ as adj .
] ( stolen ) stolen goods.dishonestly pass off ( another person 's ideas ) as one 's own : accusations that one group had stolen ideas from the other were soon flying...There 's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sureAnd you know sometimes words have two meaningsIn the tree by the brook there 's a songbird who singsSometimes all of our thoughts are mis-given</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For fuck's sake, Slashdotters.stealverb[ trans.
] take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it : thieves stole her bicycle | [ intrans.
] she was found guilty of stealing from her employers | [as adj.
] ( stolen) stolen goods.dishonestly pass off (another person's ideas) as one's own : accusations that one group had stolen ideas from the other were soon flying...There's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sureAnd you know sometimes words have two meaningsIn the tree by the brook there's a songbird who singsSometimes all of our thoughts are mis-given</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28435719</id>
	<title>Re:Lots of ffmpeg gpl violations</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1245787980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag (in this case "Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash" costs $600!).
<br>
They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
ffmpeg keeps a "Hall of shame" for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.</i> <br> <br>A "Hall of shame" is hardly likely to be any discouragement to commercial pirates. The only way to deal with these is to apply copyright law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag ( in this case " Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash " costs $ 600 ! ) .
They tend to fall into two camps , those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license ; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they 've followed it .
ffmpeg keeps a " Hall of shame " for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added .
A " Hall of shame " is hardly likely to be any discouragement to commercial pirates .
The only way to deal with these is to apply copyright law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag (in this case "Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash" costs $600!).
They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
ffmpeg keeps a "Hall of shame" for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.
A "Hall of shame" is hardly likely to be any discouragement to commercial pirates.
The only way to deal with these is to apply copyright law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416673</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245604980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I love the double-standard so much. Piracy is fine but GPL violations ? OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.</p></div><p>Here's the difference:</p><p>If I copy code that you wrote, incorporate parts of it into my own software, and release it as my own without crediting you (either for sale in a commercial product or under a free license), I am plagiarizing your work.  I am taking the credit for a work you created.</p><p>If I download a movie you created from a P2P network, and make it available for others to download from me, I am not taking any credit for creating the movie.  If I rip a DVD and upload it via BitTorrent, not only will I not take the credit for creating the film, but I'll include a description that gives proper credit to the people who did, and links to the film's official web site and IMDB for more details.  If I burn copies of the movie to DVD, put it in a plastic case and sell it on the street, I'll include a cover label with that same information, and make sure potential buyers don't mistakenly believe it's really <i>my</i> film.</p><p>If I copy a video game from a friend at a LAN party, and set up a shared drive on the LAN so everyone else can install it too, I am not taking any credit for creating the game myself.  Everyone there understands that the company who did create the game put a lot of resources into its development, and their employees are proud of what they've created.  If I charge admission for people to come to the party, nobody thinks I had anything to do with the creation of the games we're playing.</p><p>All of these are copyright violations, and I could profit from them.  However, only the first example involves any sort of dishonesty.  Many Slashdotters don't have a huge objection to copyright infringement by itself, as long as you're not profiting from it (for example, downloading a movie but not selling DVDs; sharing games at a LAN party but not charging admission).  However, plagiarism is completely different, and if you plagiarize <i>and</i> profit from it, you're not going to get much sympathy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the double-standard so much .
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.Here 's the difference : If I copy code that you wrote , incorporate parts of it into my own software , and release it as my own without crediting you ( either for sale in a commercial product or under a free license ) , I am plagiarizing your work .
I am taking the credit for a work you created.If I download a movie you created from a P2P network , and make it available for others to download from me , I am not taking any credit for creating the movie .
If I rip a DVD and upload it via BitTorrent , not only will I not take the credit for creating the film , but I 'll include a description that gives proper credit to the people who did , and links to the film 's official web site and IMDB for more details .
If I burn copies of the movie to DVD , put it in a plastic case and sell it on the street , I 'll include a cover label with that same information , and make sure potential buyers do n't mistakenly believe it 's really my film.If I copy a video game from a friend at a LAN party , and set up a shared drive on the LAN so everyone else can install it too , I am not taking any credit for creating the game myself .
Everyone there understands that the company who did create the game put a lot of resources into its development , and their employees are proud of what they 've created .
If I charge admission for people to come to the party , nobody thinks I had anything to do with the creation of the games we 're playing.All of these are copyright violations , and I could profit from them .
However , only the first example involves any sort of dishonesty .
Many Slashdotters do n't have a huge objection to copyright infringement by itself , as long as you 're not profiting from it ( for example , downloading a movie but not selling DVDs ; sharing games at a LAN party but not charging admission ) .
However , plagiarism is completely different , and if you plagiarize and profit from it , you 're not going to get much sympathy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the double-standard so much.
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.Here's the difference:If I copy code that you wrote, incorporate parts of it into my own software, and release it as my own without crediting you (either for sale in a commercial product or under a free license), I am plagiarizing your work.
I am taking the credit for a work you created.If I download a movie you created from a P2P network, and make it available for others to download from me, I am not taking any credit for creating the movie.
If I rip a DVD and upload it via BitTorrent, not only will I not take the credit for creating the film, but I'll include a description that gives proper credit to the people who did, and links to the film's official web site and IMDB for more details.
If I burn copies of the movie to DVD, put it in a plastic case and sell it on the street, I'll include a cover label with that same information, and make sure potential buyers don't mistakenly believe it's really my film.If I copy a video game from a friend at a LAN party, and set up a shared drive on the LAN so everyone else can install it too, I am not taking any credit for creating the game myself.
Everyone there understands that the company who did create the game put a lot of resources into its development, and their employees are proud of what they've created.
If I charge admission for people to come to the party, nobody thinks I had anything to do with the creation of the games we're playing.All of these are copyright violations, and I could profit from them.
However, only the first example involves any sort of dishonesty.
Many Slashdotters don't have a huge objection to copyright infringement by itself, as long as you're not profiting from it (for example, downloading a movie but not selling DVDs; sharing games at a LAN party but not charging admission).
However, plagiarism is completely different, and if you plagiarize and profit from it, you're not going to get much sympathy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28441785</id>
	<title>Re:This is how open source can make money, in fact</title>
	<author>Ash-Fox</author>
	<datestamp>1245782760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I can't find the advertising clause in the GPL license, so what exactly did he violate in the GPL license?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again .
I ca n't find the advertising clause in the GPL license , so what exactly did he violate in the GPL license ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again.
I can't find the advertising clause in the GPL license, so what exactly did he violate in the GPL license?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416259</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox extension source?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245602280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-1 Misinformed</p><p>Not true. You can use a compiled library in your extension. Look at the Google Toolbar, for example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-1 MisinformedNot true .
You can use a compiled library in your extension .
Look at the Google Toolbar , for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-1 MisinformedNot true.
You can use a compiled library in your extension.
Look at the Google Toolbar, for example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415719</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245598380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Piracy tends to take the entire program, everyone *knows* that's Microsoft's Windows XP or THQ's Warhammer they're playing. Taking code without attribution is what's so shitty about violating GPL. Cause they would've just shared if they asked nicely and weren't trying to make money out of someone elses work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Piracy tends to take the entire program , everyone * knows * that 's Microsoft 's Windows XP or THQ 's Warhammer they 're playing .
Taking code without attribution is what 's so shitty about violating GPL .
Cause they would 've just shared if they asked nicely and were n't trying to make money out of someone elses work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Piracy tends to take the entire program, everyone *knows* that's Microsoft's Windows XP or THQ's Warhammer they're playing.
Taking code without attribution is what's so shitty about violating GPL.
Cause they would've just shared if they asked nicely and weren't trying to make money out of someone elses work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28419601</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>bentcd</author>
	<datestamp>1245673560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable...</p></div><p>I'm guessing "w00t!", but suspect that "yay!" may be a strong contender.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable...I 'm guessing " w00t !
" , but suspect that " yay !
" may be a strong contender .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable...I'm guessing "w00t!
", but suspect that "yay!
" may be a strong contender.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415391</id>
	<title>Slightly off-topic but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245595260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work [...]</p></div></blockquote><p>I <em>hate</em> globalisation. I am not a <em>global citizen</em>.</p><p>But I do give to FOSS projects (albeit a modest amount) because I believe in <em>freedom</em> and <em>software freedom</em>.</p><p>The author drops marginally-related words like <em>global</em> in his editorial like a politician. (In practice they seek to redirect our attention and slightly redefine existing concepts.) STOP TELLING ME HOW TO THINK!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work [ ... ] I hate globalisation .
I am not a global citizen.But I do give to FOSS projects ( albeit a modest amount ) because I believe in freedom and software freedom.The author drops marginally-related words like global in his editorial like a politician .
( In practice they seek to redirect our attention and slightly redefine existing concepts .
) STOP TELLING ME HOW TO THINK !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work [...]I hate globalisation.
I am not a global citizen.But I do give to FOSS projects (albeit a modest amount) because I believe in freedom and software freedom.The author drops marginally-related words like global in his editorial like a politician.
(In practice they seek to redirect our attention and slightly redefine existing concepts.
) STOP TELLING ME HOW TO THINK!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421275</id>
	<title>Re:Someone used my "free" software, kill them!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245682620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GPL people are dreaming of free software. The BSD people are living it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL people are dreaming of free software .
The BSD people are living it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL people are dreaming of free software.
The BSD people are living it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413627</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245579240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait just a minute!</p><p>Let me get this straight - a company well known for their REVERSE ENGINEERING tools,<br>decides to take someone else's code and re-release it without even changing a darned thing?</p><p>I'm shocked, I say! Shocked beyond all belief!</p><p>http://www.sothink.com/product/flashdecompiler/index.htm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait just a minute ! Let me get this straight - a company well known for their REVERSE ENGINEERING tools,decides to take someone else 's code and re-release it without even changing a darned thing ? I 'm shocked , I say !
Shocked beyond all belief ! http : //www.sothink.com/product/flashdecompiler/index.htm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait just a minute!Let me get this straight - a company well known for their REVERSE ENGINEERING tools,decides to take someone else's code and re-release it without even changing a darned thing?I'm shocked, I say!
Shocked beyond all belief!http://www.sothink.com/product/flashdecompiler/index.htm</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415351</id>
	<title>Re:Sigh</title>
	<author>Main Gauche</author>
	<datestamp>1245594840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/steal" title="merriam-webster.com">http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/steal</a> [merriam-webster.com] :</p><p><b>steal</b> <i>transitive verb</i> 1 a: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.</p><p>Sounds like an accurate use to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From http : //www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/steal [ merriam-webster.com ] : steal transitive verb 1 a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.Sounds like an accurate use to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/steal [merriam-webster.com] :steal transitive verb 1 a: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.Sounds like an accurate use to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</id>
	<title>Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245614940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love the double-standard so much.  Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?  OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.  "Yes but you see, it is not the same...  Sothink as a company is making money off it."  Yeah, maybe.  In most case of GPL violations tough, the percentage of the new work work in violation is so small as to be insignificant.  And still, if it were another freeware app, people would still complain and scream "TRIAL !"

I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the double-standard so much .
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES .
" Yes but you see , it is not the same... Sothink as a company is making money off it .
" Yeah , maybe .
In most case of GPL violations tough , the percentage of the new work work in violation is so small as to be insignificant .
And still , if it were another freeware app , people would still complain and scream " TRIAL !
" I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the double-standard so much.
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.
"Yes but you see, it is not the same...  Sothink as a company is making money off it.
"  Yeah, maybe.
In most case of GPL violations tough, the percentage of the new work work in violation is so small as to be insignificant.
And still, if it were another freeware app, people would still complain and scream "TRIAL !
"

I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414341</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1245585300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In a world without copyright, all commercial software money would be made off support contracts.</p></div><p>In a world without copyright more code would be closed source.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a world without copyright , all commercial software money would be made off support contracts.In a world without copyright more code would be closed source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a world without copyright, all commercial software money would be made off support contracts.In a world without copyright more code would be closed source.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</id>
	<title>Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245614640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.</p></div><p>[citation needed]<br> <br>

I really don't agree with that sentiment.  I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin.  I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code.  He could always turn it over to the EFF for help if he really wants to prosecute to the fullest extent.  I doubt that lawsuits are going to help this situation or deter others.  They'll just get more crafty about it if they feel the need to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work , pass it off as their own , never acknowledge or give credit , and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences .
[ citation needed ] I really do n't agree with that sentiment .
I mean , there have been a few recent cases ( BusyBox ) where the company is making money off of it but I do n't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin .
I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink , I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code .
He could always turn it over to the EFF for help if he really wants to prosecute to the fullest extent .
I doubt that lawsuits are going to help this situation or deter others .
They 'll just get more crafty about it if they feel the need to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.
[citation needed] 

I really don't agree with that sentiment.
I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin.
I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code.
He could always turn it over to the EFF for help if he really wants to prosecute to the fullest extent.
I doubt that lawsuits are going to help this situation or deter others.
They'll just get more crafty about it if they feel the need to.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414405</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1245585900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers (i.e. they only get access to the interface and the output, not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service).</p></div><p>There are applications for which the bandwidth and latency of an Internet connection to your customers just don't cut it. One of these is video games that aren't turn-based: if the entire game runs on the server and just uses the customer's equipment to relay input, video, and sound, the player <em>will</em> see the compression artifacts and <em>will</em> feel the lag.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers ( i.e .
they only get access to the interface and the output , not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service ) .There are applications for which the bandwidth and latency of an Internet connection to your customers just do n't cut it .
One of these is video games that are n't turn-based : if the entire game runs on the server and just uses the customer 's equipment to relay input , video , and sound , the player will see the compression artifacts and will feel the lag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers (i.e.
they only get access to the interface and the output, not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service).There are applications for which the bandwidth and latency of an Internet connection to your customers just don't cut it.
One of these is video games that aren't turn-based: if the entire game runs on the server and just uses the customer's equipment to relay input, video, and sound, the player will see the compression artifacts and will feel the lag.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413645</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413675</id>
	<title>Re:And how is th different from the RIAA and MPAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245579540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The difference that you are not seeing is that:<br>in one case the theft is occurring for personal non-profit use, in the other, the theft is occuring for profit.<br><br>Its the difference between downloading a movie from the internets to watch at home, and downloading a movie on the internets and getting people to pay to come over and watch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference that you are not seeing is that : in one case the theft is occurring for personal non-profit use , in the other , the theft is occuring for profit.Its the difference between downloading a movie from the internets to watch at home , and downloading a movie on the internets and getting people to pay to come over and watch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference that you are not seeing is that:in one case the theft is occurring for personal non-profit use, in the other, the theft is occuring for profit.Its the difference between downloading a movie from the internets to watch at home, and downloading a movie on the internets and getting people to pay to come over and watch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414545</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245586980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For what it's worth, I run a small Press Release site at <a href="http://prfocus.com/" title="prfocus.com" rel="nofollow">prFocus.com</a> [prfocus.com] (please don't Slashdot me!) and because of SoThink's rather blatant violation of the GPL, I've removed all of their press releases from the site (about 30 or so). I've also permanently banned them from submitting any more. Fuck them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For what it 's worth , I run a small Press Release site at prFocus.com [ prfocus.com ] ( please do n't Slashdot me !
) and because of SoThink 's rather blatant violation of the GPL , I 've removed all of their press releases from the site ( about 30 or so ) .
I 've also permanently banned them from submitting any more .
Fuck them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For what it's worth, I run a small Press Release site at prFocus.com [prfocus.com] (please don't Slashdot me!
) and because of SoThink's rather blatant violation of the GPL, I've removed all of their press releases from the site (about 30 or so).
I've also permanently banned them from submitting any more.
Fuck them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414779</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox extension source?</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1245589200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, they are not being uber cool C code also permits people to steal it. You can read the code so why not copy paste right? It is not like it is "real code"?</p><p>I will post a RFE to Firefox to ROT13 the extensions, perhaps being incomprehensible looking will give them more credit for their years of work...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , they are not being uber cool C code also permits people to steal it .
You can read the code so why not copy paste right ?
It is not like it is " real code " ? I will post a RFE to Firefox to ROT13 the extensions , perhaps being incomprehensible looking will give them more credit for their years of work... : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, they are not being uber cool C code also permits people to steal it.
You can read the code so why not copy paste right?
It is not like it is "real code"?I will post a RFE to Firefox to ROT13 the extensions, perhaps being incomprehensible looking will give them more credit for their years of work... :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414073</id>
	<title>Re:Stop complaining, babies.</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1245582900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So anything that's free, is automatically public domain?<br>Or do you think there's actually a reason why those open source programmers use licenses?<br>If they wanted their code to be used by anybody, they could have chosen pretty much any open source license except GPL.<br>But they chose GPL and other people can choose to either not use the code, or use the code under the GPL license terms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So anything that 's free , is automatically public domain ? Or do you think there 's actually a reason why those open source programmers use licenses ? If they wanted their code to be used by anybody , they could have chosen pretty much any open source license except GPL.But they chose GPL and other people can choose to either not use the code , or use the code under the GPL license terms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So anything that's free, is automatically public domain?Or do you think there's actually a reason why those open source programmers use licenses?If they wanted their code to be used by anybody, they could have chosen pretty much any open source license except GPL.But they chose GPL and other people can choose to either not use the code, or use the code under the GPL license terms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159</id>
	<title>it's stealing</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1245575580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right, it's not exactly the same as other forms of stealing. But the general term for this is stealing. Presumably this would be listed as another definition in a dictionary.</p><p>If you can steal someone's heart, if you can steal a kiss, if you can steal cable, if you can steal an identity, there's no reason this cannot be stealing also.</p><p>It has been this way a long time too, stealing cable started in the 70s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right , it 's not exactly the same as other forms of stealing .
But the general term for this is stealing .
Presumably this would be listed as another definition in a dictionary.If you can steal someone 's heart , if you can steal a kiss , if you can steal cable , if you can steal an identity , there 's no reason this can not be stealing also.It has been this way a long time too , stealing cable started in the 70s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right, it's not exactly the same as other forms of stealing.
But the general term for this is stealing.
Presumably this would be listed as another definition in a dictionary.If you can steal someone's heart, if you can steal a kiss, if you can steal cable, if you can steal an identity, there's no reason this cannot be stealing also.It has been this way a long time too, stealing cable started in the 70s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416607</id>
	<title>Re:Someone used my "free" software, kill them!</title>
	<author>Orgasmatron</author>
	<datestamp>1245604500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the whole <b>point</b> of GPL!  GPL keeps free software free for everyone.</p><p>Oh, and hint to future posters, if you see "GPL" in a story, that story is about free software and not about open source.  The creators and users of the Gnu Public License don't give a fuck about your open source movement (in general).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the whole point of GPL !
GPL keeps free software free for everyone.Oh , and hint to future posters , if you see " GPL " in a story , that story is about free software and not about open source .
The creators and users of the Gnu Public License do n't give a fuck about your open source movement ( in general ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the whole point of GPL!
GPL keeps free software free for everyone.Oh, and hint to future posters, if you see "GPL" in a story, that story is about free software and not about open source.
The creators and users of the Gnu Public License don't give a fuck about your open source movement (in general).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415539</id>
	<title>This IS NOT A GPL VIOLATION.</title>
	<author>Jason Pollock</author>
	<datestamp>1245596880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery, and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license.  That's \_it\_.  It does not require you to perform any advertising, nor acknowledge where the code came from.  You want attribution?  Use the old BSD license, or the new Apache one, not the GPL.</p><p>I would say that plugin address spaces aren't kept separate (thus avoiding the issue entirely) is a Firefox \_bug\_ (or perhaps it's designed that way on purpose), rather than any GPL violation.</p><p>So far, nothing in the summary (nor any of the articles) points out the GPL violation.</p><p>Additionally, if you're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed can't coexist with plugins that aren't GPL'ed, that's an interesting statement.  If that were true, I would hope that the GPL is \_banned\_ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery , and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license .
That 's \ _it \ _ .
It does not require you to perform any advertising , nor acknowledge where the code came from .
You want attribution ?
Use the old BSD license , or the new Apache one , not the GPL.I would say that plugin address spaces are n't kept separate ( thus avoiding the issue entirely ) is a Firefox \ _bug \ _ ( or perhaps it 's designed that way on purpose ) , rather than any GPL violation.So far , nothing in the summary ( nor any of the articles ) points out the GPL violation.Additionally , if you 're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed ca n't coexist with plugins that are n't GPL'ed , that 's an interesting statement .
If that were true , I would hope that the GPL is \ _banned \ _ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery, and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license.
That's \_it\_.
It does not require you to perform any advertising, nor acknowledge where the code came from.
You want attribution?
Use the old BSD license, or the new Apache one, not the GPL.I would say that plugin address spaces aren't kept separate (thus avoiding the issue entirely) is a Firefox \_bug\_ (or perhaps it's designed that way on purpose), rather than any GPL violation.So far, nothing in the summary (nor any of the articles) points out the GPL violation.Additionally, if you're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed can't coexist with plugins that aren't GPL'ed, that's an interesting statement.
If that were true, I would hope that the GPL is \_banned\_ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Kaboom13</author>
	<datestamp>1245578640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a world without copyright, all commercial software money would be made off support contracts.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it means the exact opposite of what you intend will happen in a lot of cases.  Developers will clamp down as tight as they can on their source, protecting it as a trade secret.  As long as they are the only ones with the source, they have a huge advantage in giving support.  It is a hundred times easier to patch a bug, or add a requested feature, when you have the source.  Currently you can make the source available if you so choose, without licensing it like the GPL.  In fact, Microsoft does just that for Windows.  If copyright ended today, do you think they would just shrug their shoulders and gpl everything?  No, they would do everything in their power to consolidate as much knowledge of of Windows and it's source with them, so competitors can not quickly create their own windows distro (for lack of a better term) and claim a piece of the support contract pie.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a world without copyright , all commercial software money would be made off support contracts .
That 's not necessarily a bad thing , but it means the exact opposite of what you intend will happen in a lot of cases .
Developers will clamp down as tight as they can on their source , protecting it as a trade secret .
As long as they are the only ones with the source , they have a huge advantage in giving support .
It is a hundred times easier to patch a bug , or add a requested feature , when you have the source .
Currently you can make the source available if you so choose , without licensing it like the GPL .
In fact , Microsoft does just that for Windows .
If copyright ended today , do you think they would just shrug their shoulders and gpl everything ?
No , they would do everything in their power to consolidate as much knowledge of of Windows and it 's source with them , so competitors can not quickly create their own windows distro ( for lack of a better term ) and claim a piece of the support contract pie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a world without copyright, all commercial software money would be made off support contracts.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it means the exact opposite of what you intend will happen in a lot of cases.
Developers will clamp down as tight as they can on their source, protecting it as a trade secret.
As long as they are the only ones with the source, they have a huge advantage in giving support.
It is a hundred times easier to patch a bug, or add a requested feature, when you have the source.
Currently you can make the source available if you so choose, without licensing it like the GPL.
In fact, Microsoft does just that for Windows.
If copyright ended today, do you think they would just shrug their shoulders and gpl everything?
No, they would do everything in their power to consolidate as much knowledge of of Windows and it's source with them, so competitors can not quickly create their own windows distro (for lack of a better term) and claim a piece of the support contract pie.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412745</id>
	<title>Dumb and pointless.</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1245615600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Refactor, relicense.</p><p>They should rewrite the whole thing if they can be bothered, and use the BSD license; that way they get what they need, and it would help the rest of us out as well.</p><p>Remember, kids; GPL violation is only an issue with code that uses the GPL.  If you don't use the GPL, you won't have its' drawbacks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Refactor , relicense.They should rewrite the whole thing if they can be bothered , and use the BSD license ; that way they get what they need , and it would help the rest of us out as well.Remember , kids ; GPL violation is only an issue with code that uses the GPL .
If you do n't use the GPL , you wo n't have its ' drawbacks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Refactor, relicense.They should rewrite the whole thing if they can be bothered, and use the BSD license; that way they get what they need, and it would help the rest of us out as well.Remember, kids; GPL violation is only an issue with code that uses the GPL.
If you don't use the GPL, you won't have its' drawbacks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417537</id>
	<title>Re:How can you "steal" code?</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1245612360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plagiarism has been informally called "stealing" for decades. Still incorrect, but a bit less so than the RIAA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plagiarism has been informally called " stealing " for decades .
Still incorrect , but a bit less so than the RIAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plagiarism has been informally called "stealing" for decades.
Still incorrect, but a bit less so than the RIAA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414419</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413083</id>
	<title>Re:Stop complaining, babies.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245574920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you a programmer? Do you write GPL code? I'd bet you don't. Don't speak in the name of other people. The GPL is very clear what you can do and what you can't do. And if people are violating it, they are committing copyright infringement and the developers have the right to complain. Among the thing that it says it's clear that you can't "take a piece" and pass as it was yours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you a programmer ?
Do you write GPL code ?
I 'd bet you do n't .
Do n't speak in the name of other people .
The GPL is very clear what you can do and what you ca n't do .
And if people are violating it , they are committing copyright infringement and the developers have the right to complain .
Among the thing that it says it 's clear that you ca n't " take a piece " and pass as it was yours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you a programmer?
Do you write GPL code?
I'd bet you don't.
Don't speak in the name of other people.
The GPL is very clear what you can do and what you can't do.
And if people are violating it, they are committing copyright infringement and the developers have the right to complain.
Among the thing that it says it's clear that you can't "take a piece" and pass as it was yours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412735</id>
	<title>Speaking of Astroturfing</title>
	<author>Filter</author>
	<datestamp>1245615540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If my code gets 'stolen', used without my permission, breaking the terms of the license; what difference does it make as to the license I chose to release it under.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If my code gets 'stolen ' , used without my permission , breaking the terms of the license ; what difference does it make as to the license I chose to release it under .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If my code gets 'stolen', used without my permission, breaking the terms of the license; what difference does it make as to the license I chose to release it under.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412929</id>
	<title>Re:Illegal Copyleft Infringement.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, stealing, as in taking something and claiming they wrote it. That's really not the correct term, however; the term the original writer wanted was 'plagiarizing'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , stealing , as in taking something and claiming they wrote it .
That 's really not the correct term , however ; the term the original writer wanted was 'plagiarizing' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, stealing, as in taking something and claiming they wrote it.
That's really not the correct term, however; the term the original writer wanted was 'plagiarizing'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073</id>
	<title>Lots of ffmpeg gpl violations</title>
	<author>BeardedChimp</author>
	<datestamp>1245574800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag (in this case "Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash" costs $600!). <br> <br>
They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
<br>
ffmpeg keeps a <a href="http://ffmpeg.org/shame.html" title="ffmpeg.org" rel="nofollow">"Hall of shame"</a> [ffmpeg.org] for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.<br> <br>
I downloaded their videoconverter and ran it through wine. It gave me a eula with some non-gpl/lgpl terms which I duly said yes to
"You may not make or distribute copies of the Software, or
electronically transfer the Software from one computer to
another or over a network. You may not recompile, reverse
engineer, disassemble, or otherwise reduce the Software
to a human-perceivable form".<br> <br> Program installed what's this, avcodec.dll oh dear. Compiled in with x264, xvid etc. so GPL rather than LGPL. For a token gesture it created a folder called xvid with the GPL placed in there even though they violate most of it.<br> <br>
Stealing code from flashgot is a minor issue compared to that of ffmpeg.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag ( in this case " Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash " costs $ 600 ! ) .
They tend to fall into two camps , those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license ; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they 've followed it .
ffmpeg keeps a " Hall of shame " [ ffmpeg.org ] for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added .
I downloaded their videoconverter and ran it through wine .
It gave me a eula with some non-gpl/lgpl terms which I duly said yes to " You may not make or distribute copies of the Software , or electronically transfer the Software from one computer to another or over a network .
You may not recompile , reverse engineer , disassemble , or otherwise reduce the Software to a human-perceivable form " .
Program installed what 's this , avcodec.dll oh dear .
Compiled in with x264 , xvid etc .
so GPL rather than LGPL .
For a token gesture it created a folder called xvid with the GPL placed in there even though they violate most of it .
Stealing code from flashgot is a minor issue compared to that of ffmpeg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the last few years a lot of companies have sprang up using ffmpeg as a backend while shoving some putrid gui over the top which somehow justifies the pricetag (in this case "Video Encoder Engine for Adobe Flash" costs $600!).
They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
ffmpeg keeps a "Hall of shame" [ffmpeg.org] for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.
I downloaded their videoconverter and ran it through wine.
It gave me a eula with some non-gpl/lgpl terms which I duly said yes to
"You may not make or distribute copies of the Software, or
electronically transfer the Software from one computer to
another or over a network.
You may not recompile, reverse
engineer, disassemble, or otherwise reduce the Software
to a human-perceivable form".
Program installed what's this, avcodec.dll oh dear.
Compiled in with x264, xvid etc.
so GPL rather than LGPL.
For a token gesture it created a folder called xvid with the GPL placed in there even though they violate most of it.
Stealing code from flashgot is a minor issue compared to that of ffmpeg.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412847</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.</p></div><p>"Yipee"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well .
" Yipee " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.
"Yipee"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414853</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245589800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I love the double-standard so much. Piracy is fine but GPL violations ? OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.</p></div><p>You write as if Slashdot would be one single person. Do I really have to explain that there are thousands of people commenting on Slashdot, with wildly varying opinions on different subjects. It could very well be that different subsets of the Slashdot populace are attracted to the articles on piracy and GPL violations, but apparently, your simple mind cannot fathom this. Unless you get down to individuals, you cannot claim that the entire Slashdot populace has a double standard and still expect to be taken seriously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the double-standard so much .
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.You write as if Slashdot would be one single person .
Do I really have to explain that there are thousands of people commenting on Slashdot , with wildly varying opinions on different subjects .
It could very well be that different subsets of the Slashdot populace are attracted to the articles on piracy and GPL violations , but apparently , your simple mind can not fathom this .
Unless you get down to individuals , you can not claim that the entire Slashdot populace has a double standard and still expect to be taken seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the double-standard so much.
Piracy is fine but GPL violations ?
OH GOD STOP THE PRESSES.You write as if Slashdot would be one single person.
Do I really have to explain that there are thousands of people commenting on Slashdot, with wildly varying opinions on different subjects.
It could very well be that different subsets of the Slashdot populace are attracted to the articles on piracy and GPL violations, but apparently, your simple mind cannot fathom this.
Unless you get down to individuals, you cannot claim that the entire Slashdot populace has a double standard and still expect to be taken seriously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414003</id>
	<title>Re:it's not stealing, its bad grammar.</title>
	<author>thunderclap</author>
	<datestamp>1245582300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, the correct way to have said this is "People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by plagiarizing a piece of core code from FlashGot." This requires you to actually use your vocabulary you were taught in school.
And none of those is correct grammar or vocabulary either. You can't steal someones heart without them dying. The "steal your heart" is a aphorism. "Its means to fall in love while resisting" And you aren't stealing cable, unless you are actually taking the coax, you are illegally accessing the service. You aren't stealing an identity, you are falsely representing yourself.
By definition stealing means to remove and deprive the owner of a physical object. This means the owner loses possession of it. Anything that is not physical can't be stolen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the correct way to have said this is " People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by plagiarizing a piece of core code from FlashGot .
" This requires you to actually use your vocabulary you were taught in school .
And none of those is correct grammar or vocabulary either .
You ca n't steal someones heart without them dying .
The " steal your heart " is a aphorism .
" Its means to fall in love while resisting " And you are n't stealing cable , unless you are actually taking the coax , you are illegally accessing the service .
You are n't stealing an identity , you are falsely representing yourself .
By definition stealing means to remove and deprive the owner of a physical object .
This means the owner loses possession of it .
Anything that is not physical ca n't be stolen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the correct way to have said this is "People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by plagiarizing a piece of core code from FlashGot.
" This requires you to actually use your vocabulary you were taught in school.
And none of those is correct grammar or vocabulary either.
You can't steal someones heart without them dying.
The "steal your heart" is a aphorism.
"Its means to fall in love while resisting" And you aren't stealing cable, unless you are actually taking the coax, you are illegally accessing the service.
You aren't stealing an identity, you are falsely representing yourself.
By definition stealing means to remove and deprive the owner of a physical object.
This means the owner loses possession of it.
Anything that is not physical can't be stolen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422131</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1245685440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that OP's point was that it is much easier to just abandon F/OSS and do everything through proprietary software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that OP 's point was that it is much easier to just abandon F/OSS and do everything through proprietary software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that OP's point was that it is much easier to just abandon F/OSS and do everything through proprietary software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414777</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>init100</author>
	<datestamp>1245589200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>driving over there and storming the building, or DDOSing his servers, if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong.</p></div><p>So you would want to commit a crime to punish him for his crime? If you'd actually do that, you wouldn't be able to take the moral high road as the innocent victim. And by the way, do you really consider "storming the building" a proportionate response to a license violation?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>driving over there and storming the building , or DDOSing his servers , if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong.So you would want to commit a crime to punish him for his crime ?
If you 'd actually do that , you would n't be able to take the moral high road as the innocent victim .
And by the way , do you really consider " storming the building " a proportionate response to a license violation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>driving over there and storming the building, or DDOSing his servers, if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong.So you would want to commit a crime to punish him for his crime?
If you'd actually do that, you wouldn't be able to take the moral high road as the innocent victim.
And by the way, do you really consider "storming the building" a proportionate response to a license violation?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413013</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413843</id>
	<title>Re:Sigh</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1245581040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is more that's different than the victim here.</p><p>
This is more severe than simple copyright infringement.  This is re-branding someone else's work and marketing it as if you created it, in complete violation of their property rights.
</p><p>
This is theft.
</p><p>
For the same reason it would be theft if Intel conducted espionage to rip-off a copy of AMD chip designs, and fabbed their own (Intel branded) AMD chips.
</p><p>
They aren't commiting a repeated theft for each time they distribute their plugin, however, they committed it once.
</p><p>
And the primary thing that's been stolen is credit for the creators of the work, and the right of the recipient(s) of derived works to be able to obtain modified source code.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is more that 's different than the victim here .
This is more severe than simple copyright infringement .
This is re-branding someone else 's work and marketing it as if you created it , in complete violation of their property rights .
This is theft .
For the same reason it would be theft if Intel conducted espionage to rip-off a copy of AMD chip designs , and fabbed their own ( Intel branded ) AMD chips .
They are n't commiting a repeated theft for each time they distribute their plugin , however , they committed it once .
And the primary thing that 's been stolen is credit for the creators of the work , and the right of the recipient ( s ) of derived works to be able to obtain modified source code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is more that's different than the victim here.
This is more severe than simple copyright infringement.
This is re-branding someone else's work and marketing it as if you created it, in complete violation of their property rights.
This is theft.
For the same reason it would be theft if Intel conducted espionage to rip-off a copy of AMD chip designs, and fabbed their own (Intel branded) AMD chips.
They aren't commiting a repeated theft for each time they distribute their plugin, however, they committed it once.
And the primary thing that's been stolen is credit for the creators of the work, and the right of the recipient(s) of derived works to be able to obtain modified source code.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416741</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1245605340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tend to agree. Besides, that bit about "and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences" is a crock. If they had any shame, they wouldn't have ripped off the actual authors in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree .
Besides , that bit about " and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences " is a crock .
If they had any shame , they would n't have ripped off the actual authors in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree.
Besides, that bit about "and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences" is a crock.
If they had any shame, they wouldn't have ripped off the actual authors in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413707</id>
	<title>Re:unzip sothink.xpi?</title>
	<author>emurphy42</author>
	<datestamp>1245579720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just downloaded one of their other things (<a href="http://www2.sothink.com/download/swfcatcher.xpi" title="sothink.com">swfcatcher.xpi</a> [sothink.com], it's the first one I found a bare URL for) and unzipped it, and the main part (chrome/swfcatcher.jar) is Java, not JS.  I assume the one in question here is similar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just downloaded one of their other things ( swfcatcher.xpi [ sothink.com ] , it 's the first one I found a bare URL for ) and unzipped it , and the main part ( chrome/swfcatcher.jar ) is Java , not JS .
I assume the one in question here is similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just downloaded one of their other things (swfcatcher.xpi [sothink.com], it's the first one I found a bare URL for) and unzipped it, and the main part (chrome/swfcatcher.jar) is Java, not JS.
I assume the one in question here is similar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412977</id>
	<title>MARE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245617280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Creek, abysmal used to.  sHIT ON</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Creek , abysmal used to .
sHIT ON [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Creek, abysmal used to.
sHIT ON [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421571</id>
	<title>Re:heh, there web page looks like a parked domain</title>
	<author>lithis</author>
	<datestamp>1245683700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why would you even download this?</p></div></blockquote><p>Because their website is copyrighted 2007-2010, and software from the future is awesome!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you even download this ? Because their website is copyrighted 2007-2010 , and software from the future is awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you even download this?Because their website is copyrighted 2007-2010, and software from the future is awesome!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412663</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426437</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1245700320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True but only to a point.  If copyright were abolished, even the limited protection that GPL gives would go away.  Companies would have no incentive to do anything but release binary products, knowing that to do otherwise would be to ensure that their present business model is not sustainable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>True but only to a point .
If copyright were abolished , even the limited protection that GPL gives would go away .
Companies would have no incentive to do anything but release binary products , knowing that to do otherwise would be to ensure that their present business model is not sustainable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True but only to a point.
If copyright were abolished, even the limited protection that GPL gives would go away.
Companies would have no incentive to do anything but release binary products, knowing that to do otherwise would be to ensure that their present business model is not sustainable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414645</id>
	<title>Are we being politicians now?</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1245587880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, they stole , hours or perhaps days/months of work. Also others work as they reported issues, donated etc.</p><p>It is stealing. They stole a digital artifact, they stole "information", "knowledge". They took something without doing something required or giving something required (credit). It is 2009 already and you people have issues with understanding the difference between "virtual" and "real" things. Virtual things can cost money, time and even health and they don't really differ from real things you can hold with your hand.</p><p>In fact, Flashgot people could even sell their completely open source extension and could also have right to blame users who doesn't "buy" it. Just as explained there: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html" title="gnu.org">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html</a> [gnu.org]</p><p>It is not a movie, don't go into "but it is not stealing" mode immediately. Oh yes, pirating a Hollywood movie is stealing too... Like I explained above. I don't really care if producer is Satan himself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they stole , hours or perhaps days/months of work .
Also others work as they reported issues , donated etc.It is stealing .
They stole a digital artifact , they stole " information " , " knowledge " .
They took something without doing something required or giving something required ( credit ) .
It is 2009 already and you people have issues with understanding the difference between " virtual " and " real " things .
Virtual things can cost money , time and even health and they do n't really differ from real things you can hold with your hand.In fact , Flashgot people could even sell their completely open source extension and could also have right to blame users who does n't " buy " it .
Just as explained there : http : //www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html [ gnu.org ] It is not a movie , do n't go into " but it is not stealing " mode immediately .
Oh yes , pirating a Hollywood movie is stealing too... Like I explained above .
I do n't really care if producer is Satan himself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they stole , hours or perhaps days/months of work.
Also others work as they reported issues, donated etc.It is stealing.
They stole a digital artifact, they stole "information", "knowledge".
They took something without doing something required or giving something required (credit).
It is 2009 already and you people have issues with understanding the difference between "virtual" and "real" things.
Virtual things can cost money, time and even health and they don't really differ from real things you can hold with your hand.In fact, Flashgot people could even sell their completely open source extension and could also have right to blame users who doesn't "buy" it.
Just as explained there: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html [gnu.org]It is not a movie, don't go into "but it is not stealing" mode immediately.
Oh yes, pirating a Hollywood movie is stealing too... Like I explained above.
I don't really care if producer is Satan himself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416759</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Digana</author>
	<datestamp>1245605520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
It's not a double standard. Copyleft is the opposite of copyright, just happens to use to hack existing copyright laws to achieve the desired effect.
</p><p>
Say defending copyleft is a double standard is like saying atheists are religious.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a double standard .
Copyleft is the opposite of copyright , just happens to use to hack existing copyright laws to achieve the desired effect .
Say defending copyleft is a double standard is like saying atheists are religious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
It's not a double standard.
Copyleft is the opposite of copyright, just happens to use to hack existing copyright laws to achieve the desired effect.
Say defending copyleft is a double standard is like saying atheists are religious.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413777</id>
	<title>Fine them</title>
	<author>koreaman</author>
	<datestamp>1245580500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$80,000 per line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 80,000 per line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$80,000 per line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28449995</id>
	<title>They're GPL-compliant now.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245875520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From SothinkMedia's Twitter: Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3, which is licensed under The GNU General Public License.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From SothinkMedia 's Twitter : Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3 , which is licensed under The GNU General Public License .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From SothinkMedia's Twitter: Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3, which is licensed under The GNU General Public License.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416911</id>
	<title>Re:Dumb and pointless.</title>
	<author>petrus4</author>
	<datestamp>1245606660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This wasn't a troll; it was an opinion, and a valid one.  Some people <i>do</i> use non-GPL licenses.</p><p>I'm still waiting for the day when Stallman's fanboys stop abusing Slashdot's moderation system, by using it as a means of attempting to silence people they disagree with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was n't a troll ; it was an opinion , and a valid one .
Some people do use non-GPL licenses.I 'm still waiting for the day when Stallman 's fanboys stop abusing Slashdot 's moderation system , by using it as a means of attempting to silence people they disagree with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This wasn't a troll; it was an opinion, and a valid one.
Some people do use non-GPL licenses.I'm still waiting for the day when Stallman's fanboys stop abusing Slashdot's moderation system, by using it as a means of attempting to silence people they disagree with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412663</id>
	<title>heh, there web page looks like a parked domain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245614880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would you even download this? Their web page and blog looks like it was created from an SEO program for selling viagra.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you even download this ?
Their web page and blog looks like it was created from an SEO program for selling viagra .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you even download this?
Their web page and blog looks like it was created from an SEO program for selling viagra.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28449925</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox extension source?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245874560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as the whole open source issue Sothink concerned, they have taken a quick and efficient measure for the case. Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License (GPL) now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as the whole open source issue Sothink concerned , they have taken a quick and efficient measure for the case .
Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License ( GPL ) now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as the whole open source issue Sothink concerned, they have taken a quick and efficient measure for the case.
Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License (GPL) now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28423577</id>
	<title>But, it is Imaginary Property.</title>
	<author>DaveV1.0</author>
	<datestamp>1245690240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares? It is just copyright infringement. Imaginary property and all that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ?
It is just copyright infringement .
Imaginary property and all that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares?
It is just copyright infringement.
Imaginary property and all that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413399</id>
	<title>Get over it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand how people can broadcast source code and at the same time be shocked stunned and amazed as their code is used in ways they didn't explicitly bless.</p><p>I fail to see how this is any different than leaving a bunch of gold coins on the street with a sign next to each "I made this, please don't take my gold coins".</p><p>Obviously sooner or later the coins will disappear.  Some people will cash them in as-is others will melt them down and sell off the gold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand how people can broadcast source code and at the same time be shocked stunned and amazed as their code is used in ways they did n't explicitly bless.I fail to see how this is any different than leaving a bunch of gold coins on the street with a sign next to each " I made this , please do n't take my gold coins " .Obviously sooner or later the coins will disappear .
Some people will cash them in as-is others will melt them down and sell off the gold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand how people can broadcast source code and at the same time be shocked stunned and amazed as their code is used in ways they didn't explicitly bless.I fail to see how this is any different than leaving a bunch of gold coins on the street with a sign next to each "I made this, please don't take my gold coins".Obviously sooner or later the coins will disappear.
Some people will cash them in as-is others will melt them down and sell off the gold.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412881</id>
	<title>GPL or not, doesn't matter.</title>
	<author>marcansoft</author>
	<datestamp>1245616620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are all kinds of unscrupulous people who will happily take other people's work and pass it as their own. For example, there's an entire bunch of websites devoted to bundling free Wii homebrew utilities with warez-loading apps and a torrent client and selling it as the ultimate Wii softmod get-all-your-games-for-free package. Examples: homebreware.com, playbreware.com, homebrewinstaller.com, mywiidownloads.com... the list goes on. They have sales numbers that are a sizable chunk of total homebrew users and mainly cater to the clueless, earning large amounts of cash for basically nothing.</p><p>Our "core" software (specifically, the Twilight Hack, Homebrew Channel, DVDX, BootMii, HackMii Installer, etc) is mostly distributed under a closed-source restrictive "download it from our site and use it, don't redistribute it" license precisely due to these kinds of websites. For example, ordinarily we wouldn't care at all about people mirroring these apps, but one of the favorite excuses from the aforementioned scamsites is that "they're just linking to some third-party mirror". the I've tried to get some of them taken down but it's damn near impossible and their payment processors (Plimus and ClickBank typically) move very slowly and do nothing at all (which is not surprising; after all, they get a cut of the profits). These sites tend to work on affiliate programs and therefore there are dozens of "affiliates" happily buying Google Ads and setting up spam blogs just to promote the scams.</p><p>What's even worse is that the warez utilities work backwards too - they let the scammers "pirate" our freeware and sell it for money. For example, our installer includes a large full-screen "if you paid for this you were scammed" warning, but the scammers have now used tools for Wii Channel piracy to distribute the Homebrew Channel without the installer, bypassing that screen. Every time this happens they get a nice 3-6 months until Nintendo puts out another update that would force them to use updated hacks and tools.</p><p>This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development. And I don't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew. Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games, generally poisons the homebrew community, divides it due to the differing opinions on it, and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are all kinds of unscrupulous people who will happily take other people 's work and pass it as their own .
For example , there 's an entire bunch of websites devoted to bundling free Wii homebrew utilities with warez-loading apps and a torrent client and selling it as the ultimate Wii softmod get-all-your-games-for-free package .
Examples : homebreware.com , playbreware.com , homebrewinstaller.com , mywiidownloads.com... the list goes on .
They have sales numbers that are a sizable chunk of total homebrew users and mainly cater to the clueless , earning large amounts of cash for basically nothing.Our " core " software ( specifically , the Twilight Hack , Homebrew Channel , DVDX , BootMii , HackMii Installer , etc ) is mostly distributed under a closed-source restrictive " download it from our site and use it , do n't redistribute it " license precisely due to these kinds of websites .
For example , ordinarily we would n't care at all about people mirroring these apps , but one of the favorite excuses from the aforementioned scamsites is that " they 're just linking to some third-party mirror " .
the I 've tried to get some of them taken down but it 's damn near impossible and their payment processors ( Plimus and ClickBank typically ) move very slowly and do nothing at all ( which is not surprising ; after all , they get a cut of the profits ) .
These sites tend to work on affiliate programs and therefore there are dozens of " affiliates " happily buying Google Ads and setting up spam blogs just to promote the scams.What 's even worse is that the warez utilities work backwards too - they let the scammers " pirate " our freeware and sell it for money .
For example , our installer includes a large full-screen " if you paid for this you were scammed " warning , but the scammers have now used tools for Wii Channel piracy to distribute the Homebrew Channel without the installer , bypassing that screen .
Every time this happens they get a nice 3-6 months until Nintendo puts out another update that would force them to use updated hacks and tools.This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development .
And I do n't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew .
Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games , generally poisons the homebrew community , divides it due to the differing opinions on it , and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are all kinds of unscrupulous people who will happily take other people's work and pass it as their own.
For example, there's an entire bunch of websites devoted to bundling free Wii homebrew utilities with warez-loading apps and a torrent client and selling it as the ultimate Wii softmod get-all-your-games-for-free package.
Examples: homebreware.com, playbreware.com, homebrewinstaller.com, mywiidownloads.com... the list goes on.
They have sales numbers that are a sizable chunk of total homebrew users and mainly cater to the clueless, earning large amounts of cash for basically nothing.Our "core" software (specifically, the Twilight Hack, Homebrew Channel, DVDX, BootMii, HackMii Installer, etc) is mostly distributed under a closed-source restrictive "download it from our site and use it, don't redistribute it" license precisely due to these kinds of websites.
For example, ordinarily we wouldn't care at all about people mirroring these apps, but one of the favorite excuses from the aforementioned scamsites is that "they're just linking to some third-party mirror".
the I've tried to get some of them taken down but it's damn near impossible and their payment processors (Plimus and ClickBank typically) move very slowly and do nothing at all (which is not surprising; after all, they get a cut of the profits).
These sites tend to work on affiliate programs and therefore there are dozens of "affiliates" happily buying Google Ads and setting up spam blogs just to promote the scams.What's even worse is that the warez utilities work backwards too - they let the scammers "pirate" our freeware and sell it for money.
For example, our installer includes a large full-screen "if you paid for this you were scammed" warning, but the scammers have now used tools for Wii Channel piracy to distribute the Homebrew Channel without the installer, bypassing that screen.
Every time this happens they get a nice 3-6 months until Nintendo puts out another update that would force them to use updated hacks and tools.This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development.
And I don't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew.
Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games, generally poisons the homebrew community, divides it due to the differing opinions on it, and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413425</id>
	<title>Re:it's stealing</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1245577740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  Stealing cable started when the telegraph operators started stringing cables between different locations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Stealing cable started when the telegraph operators started stringing cables between different locations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Stealing cable started when the telegraph operators started stringing cables between different locations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414851</id>
	<title>Any one see this on their web site?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245589800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Copyright 2007-2010. www.sothinkmedia.com All rights reserved."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Copyright 2007-2010. www.sothinkmedia.com All rights reserved .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Copyright 2007-2010. www.sothinkmedia.com All rights reserved.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413183</id>
	<title>Re:Stop complaining, babies.</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1245575760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, if anything, it's this dramatized "he's a meanie" kind of Slashdot article that puts programmers off. I feel like I'm in a primary school playground again. When I release my code open-source, it's to make the source code available to others. The only way to prevent my primary goal is by taking down the server the source code is hosted on. Using it in violation of its license is minor in comparison.

<p>Project A's code was licensed under the GPL. Project B used A's code in violation of the license (they didn't steal it). Make it known that project B is violating A's license and that project B's members have not responded on the matter. This public knowledge will harm project B's reputation, perhaps enough to motivate its members to acknowledge and come into compliance. Or it might motivate users to stop using project B and let it die off. But leave the name-calling for your inner circle of friends who will put up with that crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , if anything , it 's this dramatized " he 's a meanie " kind of Slashdot article that puts programmers off .
I feel like I 'm in a primary school playground again .
When I release my code open-source , it 's to make the source code available to others .
The only way to prevent my primary goal is by taking down the server the source code is hosted on .
Using it in violation of its license is minor in comparison .
Project A 's code was licensed under the GPL .
Project B used A 's code in violation of the license ( they did n't steal it ) .
Make it known that project B is violating A 's license and that project B 's members have not responded on the matter .
This public knowledge will harm project B 's reputation , perhaps enough to motivate its members to acknowledge and come into compliance .
Or it might motivate users to stop using project B and let it die off .
But leave the name-calling for your inner circle of friends who will put up with that crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, if anything, it's this dramatized "he's a meanie" kind of Slashdot article that puts programmers off.
I feel like I'm in a primary school playground again.
When I release my code open-source, it's to make the source code available to others.
The only way to prevent my primary goal is by taking down the server the source code is hosted on.
Using it in violation of its license is minor in comparison.
Project A's code was licensed under the GPL.
Project B used A's code in violation of the license (they didn't steal it).
Make it known that project B is violating A's license and that project B's members have not responded on the matter.
This public knowledge will harm project B's reputation, perhaps enough to motivate its members to acknowledge and come into compliance.
Or it might motivate users to stop using project B and let it die off.
But leave the name-calling for your inner circle of friends who will put up with that crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28450541</id>
	<title>Re:Firefox extension source?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245841140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they're plugins, not extensions... much like adobe flash</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're plugins , not extensions... much like adobe flash</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're plugins, not extensions... much like adobe flash</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729</id>
	<title>Illegal Copyleft Infringement.</title>
	<author>Ostracus</author>
	<datestamp>1245615540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks."</p><p>Stealing? A digital artifact?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks. " Stealing ?
A digital artifact ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot and using it without even the decency of covering their tracks."Stealing?
A digital artifact?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28430583</id>
	<title>-1 Speculation</title>
	<author>binford2k</author>
	<datestamp>1245671280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.</p></div><p>Save your editorializing until you have stats to back it up.  My impression is that the people who take their ball and go home like you suggest aren't that great for the community anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work , pass it off as their own , never acknowledge or give credit , and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.Save your editorializing until you have stats to back it up .
My impression is that the people who take their ball and go home like you suggest are n't that great for the community anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.Save your editorializing until you have stats to back it up.
My impression is that the people who take their ball and go home like you suggest aren't that great for the community anyway.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413365</id>
	<title>I like wordpress their system more...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/about/ GPL compatible or gtfo.</p><p>Firefox should step up and remove the plugin from the plugin page, i believe it is against the GPL license to distribute binary copies / ripped source in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //wordpress.org/extend/plugins/about/ GPL compatible or gtfo.Firefox should step up and remove the plugin from the plugin page , i believe it is against the GPL license to distribute binary copies / ripped source in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/about/ GPL compatible or gtfo.Firefox should step up and remove the plugin from the plugin page, i believe it is against the GPL license to distribute binary copies / ripped source in the first place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413355</id>
	<title>Re:Not to throw cold water on the outrage...</title>
	<author>Svartalf</author>
	<datestamp>1245577140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the owner HAS indicated that it was done that way in one of the linked items from the summary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the owner HAS indicated that it was done that way in one of the linked items from the summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the owner HAS indicated that it was done that way in one of the linked items from the summary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413645</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Dogtanian</author>
	<datestamp>1245579360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason <i>not/i&gt; to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free.</i></p></div><p>That shows a lack of insight for a start.<br>
They couldn't copy your software if no-one but you had access to it in the first place. You could sit on the software, using it for what it was intended for yourself (i.e. giving yourself an advantage in providing an end product, or possibly carrying out a service on behalf of others) and not letting anyone else have it at all.<br> <br>
Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers (i.e. they only get access to the interface and the output, not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service).<br> <br>
No, you're probably not going to make as much money that way. But it's still a flaw in your idealised, lack-of-thought regurgitation of "in a copyright-free world, no-one will have reason to hold on to their code" argument.<br> <br>
And that's disregarding the fact that some worthwhile code *might* not be written in the first place if people couldn't make money off by selling it with the protection of copyright.<br> <br>
Now, one could argue these points in more depth. I'm not saying that I agree with them or that they couldn't be rebutted. (Because I know from experience that at least one kneejerking idiot will otherwise assume that I'm taking the opposite position to your argument rather than simply pointing out the glaring holes and omissions in it).<br> <br>
<b>My issue was that you didn't even consider either of these rather obvious issues in the first place</b>, which pretty much negates the value of your argument.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But in a theoretical world without copyright , there would be no reason not/i &gt; to publish your source code - because you would n't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free.That shows a lack of insight for a start .
They could n't copy your software if no-one but you had access to it in the first place .
You could sit on the software , using it for what it was intended for yourself ( i.e .
giving yourself an advantage in providing an end product , or possibly carrying out a service on behalf of others ) and not letting anyone else have it at all .
Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers ( i.e .
they only get access to the interface and the output , not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service ) .
No , you 're probably not going to make as much money that way .
But it 's still a flaw in your idealised , lack-of-thought regurgitation of " in a copyright-free world , no-one will have reason to hold on to their code " argument .
And that 's disregarding the fact that some worthwhile code * might * not be written in the first place if people could n't make money off by selling it with the protection of copyright .
Now , one could argue these points in more depth .
I 'm not saying that I agree with them or that they could n't be rebutted .
( Because I know from experience that at least one kneejerking idiot will otherwise assume that I 'm taking the opposite position to your argument rather than simply pointing out the glaring holes and omissions in it ) .
My issue was that you did n't even consider either of these rather obvious issues in the first place , which pretty much negates the value of your argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason not/i&gt; to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free.That shows a lack of insight for a start.
They couldn't copy your software if no-one but you had access to it in the first place.
You could sit on the software, using it for what it was intended for yourself (i.e.
giving yourself an advantage in providing an end product, or possibly carrying out a service on behalf of others) and not letting anyone else have it at all.
Or you could force everyone to use the software through your servers (i.e.
they only get access to the interface and the output, not the underlying code- just like a server-based web app or service).
No, you're probably not going to make as much money that way.
But it's still a flaw in your idealised, lack-of-thought regurgitation of "in a copyright-free world, no-one will have reason to hold on to their code" argument.
And that's disregarding the fact that some worthwhile code *might* not be written in the first place if people couldn't make money off by selling it with the protection of copyright.
Now, one could argue these points in more depth.
I'm not saying that I agree with them or that they couldn't be rebutted.
(Because I know from experience that at least one kneejerking idiot will otherwise assume that I'm taking the opposite position to your argument rather than simply pointing out the glaring holes and omissions in it).
My issue was that you didn't even consider either of these rather obvious issues in the first place, which pretty much negates the value of your argument.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414667</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>TomViolin</author>
	<datestamp>1245588180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that if copyright were abolished, the sale of software would still continue, albeit in a more limited way, paticularly in the business world, even if everything were open-sourced.</p><p>Think of this: if you are an IT manager, are you going to trust the OS of all your production machines to some random Joe Schmo's distribution of "Free OS" downloaded from freebies.com?  No way, you are still going to get it from a reputable source, and if you have to pay for it, all the better.  The sale is in fact a sort of support contract in itself, because the exchange of funds for software thus gives you the right to go after the seller, if not legally, at least create bad press, if there is a failure.</p><p>A similar thing would happen with entertainment media.  Even though I can get just about any movie in digital form off of Pirate Bay practically the day it is released, I will still pay money to see it in the theater.  Why? Because of the experience, and because I know the picture and sound quality are going to meet certain standards (e.g. THX).  Just like I will still go to a concert even if I have downloaded the album.</p><p>The physical design of many hardware devices, such as automobiles, is pretty much open-source, hence the existence of Chilton's service manuals and the like.  But would I theoretically trust my life to a car built from open specs by Larry down the street?  Again, no way.</p><p>Yes, among hackers (of all stripes), no one would pay for anything anymore.  But if I want to take the girlfriend to a movie, or acquire software for work that works as expected the first time, or trust my life to a car, I will gladly pay a fair price for the assurance that it will "just work."</p><p>The good news is that overtly crappy software (e.g. Windows ME &amp; Vist) would never see the light of day.  But good quality products will still be profitable, and will command a price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that if copyright were abolished , the sale of software would still continue , albeit in a more limited way , paticularly in the business world , even if everything were open-sourced.Think of this : if you are an IT manager , are you going to trust the OS of all your production machines to some random Joe Schmo 's distribution of " Free OS " downloaded from freebies.com ?
No way , you are still going to get it from a reputable source , and if you have to pay for it , all the better .
The sale is in fact a sort of support contract in itself , because the exchange of funds for software thus gives you the right to go after the seller , if not legally , at least create bad press , if there is a failure.A similar thing would happen with entertainment media .
Even though I can get just about any movie in digital form off of Pirate Bay practically the day it is released , I will still pay money to see it in the theater .
Why ? Because of the experience , and because I know the picture and sound quality are going to meet certain standards ( e.g .
THX ) . Just like I will still go to a concert even if I have downloaded the album.The physical design of many hardware devices , such as automobiles , is pretty much open-source , hence the existence of Chilton 's service manuals and the like .
But would I theoretically trust my life to a car built from open specs by Larry down the street ?
Again , no way.Yes , among hackers ( of all stripes ) , no one would pay for anything anymore .
But if I want to take the girlfriend to a movie , or acquire software for work that works as expected the first time , or trust my life to a car , I will gladly pay a fair price for the assurance that it will " just work .
" The good news is that overtly crappy software ( e.g .
Windows ME &amp; Vist ) would never see the light of day .
But good quality products will still be profitable , and will command a price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that if copyright were abolished, the sale of software would still continue, albeit in a more limited way, paticularly in the business world, even if everything were open-sourced.Think of this: if you are an IT manager, are you going to trust the OS of all your production machines to some random Joe Schmo's distribution of "Free OS" downloaded from freebies.com?
No way, you are still going to get it from a reputable source, and if you have to pay for it, all the better.
The sale is in fact a sort of support contract in itself, because the exchange of funds for software thus gives you the right to go after the seller, if not legally, at least create bad press, if there is a failure.A similar thing would happen with entertainment media.
Even though I can get just about any movie in digital form off of Pirate Bay practically the day it is released, I will still pay money to see it in the theater.
Why? Because of the experience, and because I know the picture and sound quality are going to meet certain standards (e.g.
THX).  Just like I will still go to a concert even if I have downloaded the album.The physical design of many hardware devices, such as automobiles, is pretty much open-source, hence the existence of Chilton's service manuals and the like.
But would I theoretically trust my life to a car built from open specs by Larry down the street?
Again, no way.Yes, among hackers (of all stripes), no one would pay for anything anymore.
But if I want to take the girlfriend to a movie, or acquire software for work that works as expected the first time, or trust my life to a car, I will gladly pay a fair price for the assurance that it will "just work.
"The good news is that overtly crappy software (e.g.
Windows ME &amp; Vist) would never see the light of day.
But good quality products will still be profitable, and will command a price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412741</id>
	<title>dogs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245615540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dogs are quadripedal mammals that are not in any way related to cats. Dogs are natural politicians, are athletic, and have super intelligence dcapacititites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dogs are quadripedal mammals that are not in any way related to cats .
Dogs are natural politicians , are athletic , and have super intelligence dcapacititites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dogs are quadripedal mammals that are not in any way related to cats.
Dogs are natural politicians, are athletic, and have super intelligence dcapacititites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415311</id>
	<title>This is how open source can make money, in fact</title>
	<author>anton\_kg</author>
	<datestamp>1245594360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again.
Go and complain to <a href="http://gpl-violations.org/" title="gpl-violations.org" rel="nofollow">http://gpl-violations.org/</a> [gpl-violations.org] or similar. I suspect they know how to deal with it, how to win the case and make some money possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again .
Go and complain to http : //gpl-violations.org/ [ gpl-violations.org ] or similar .
I suspect they know how to deal with it , how to win the case and make some money possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we should turn around such violations so developers would become happy if someone try to do it again.
Go and complain to http://gpl-violations.org/ [gpl-violations.org] or similar.
I suspect they know how to deal with it, how to win the case and make some money possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422209</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1245685800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<i>in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason not to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free</i>"</p><p>Sounds great... right up until some enterprising programmer says "I won't release the code, therefore you can't modify it; but I can, and you can pay me to make such modifications if you need them."</p><p>Or uses DRM to continue profiting off of sales.</p><p>Or sells the use of the software rather than providing you a copy of it.</p><p>An information asymetry is an opportunity to profit.  Copyright is only one tool in that workshop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" in a theoretical world without copyright , there would be no reason not to publish your source code - because you would n't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free " Sounds great... right up until some enterprising programmer says " I wo n't release the code , therefore you ca n't modify it ; but I can , and you can pay me to make such modifications if you need them .
" Or uses DRM to continue profiting off of sales.Or sells the use of the software rather than providing you a copy of it.An information asymetry is an opportunity to profit .
Copyright is only one tool in that workshop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason not to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free"Sounds great... right up until some enterprising programmer says "I won't release the code, therefore you can't modify it; but I can, and you can pay me to make such modifications if you need them.
"Or uses DRM to continue profiting off of sales.Or sells the use of the software rather than providing you a copy of it.An information asymetry is an opportunity to profit.
Copyright is only one tool in that workshop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426401</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1245700200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here for one: <a href="http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050225223848129" title="groklaw.net">http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050225223848129</a> [groklaw.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here for one : http : //www.groklaw.net/article.php ? story = 20050225223848129 [ groklaw.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here for one: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050225223848129 [groklaw.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412877</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>fishbowl</author>
	<datestamp>1245616620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;GPL stops to be enforceable.</p><p>When has the GPL, in particular, been enforced by any agent of any government?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; GPL stops to be enforceable.When has the GPL , in particular , been enforced by any agent of any government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;GPL stops to be enforceable.When has the GPL, in particular, been enforced by any agent of any government?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426337</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1245700020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc. However, there's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.</p></div><p>Stating that there's a difference doesn't make it so.  Case 1: person takes  "data" and uses it, gives it to a few thousand of his closest friends.  Case 2: person takes "data" and uses it, sells it to paying customers.   In both cases, "data" wasn't supposed to be available for misuse due to copyright restrictions.  In both case, the wishes of the owner and/or creator of that "data" were not respected by the people doing the taking.

</p><p>
Copyright is the double-edged sword in this case.  It protects our right to GPL our source as much as it protects RIAA's right to claim ownership of an arrangement of pleasing sounds. Under the current system, you can't have one without the other - and getting offended by one abuse of copyrighted material without getting offended by the other is hypocritical. (I'm feeling pretty good about this one, as I'm offended by both abuses.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc .
However , there 's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.Stating that there 's a difference does n't make it so .
Case 1 : person takes " data " and uses it , gives it to a few thousand of his closest friends .
Case 2 : person takes " data " and uses it , sells it to paying customers .
In both cases , " data " was n't supposed to be available for misuse due to copyright restrictions .
In both case , the wishes of the owner and/or creator of that " data " were not respected by the people doing the taking .
Copyright is the double-edged sword in this case .
It protects our right to GPL our source as much as it protects RIAA 's right to claim ownership of an arrangement of pleasing sounds .
Under the current system , you ca n't have one without the other - and getting offended by one abuse of copyrighted material without getting offended by the other is hypocritical .
( I 'm feeling pretty good about this one , as I 'm offended by both abuses .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc.
However, there's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.Stating that there's a difference doesn't make it so.
Case 1: person takes  "data" and uses it, gives it to a few thousand of his closest friends.
Case 2: person takes "data" and uses it, sells it to paying customers.
In both cases, "data" wasn't supposed to be available for misuse due to copyright restrictions.
In both case, the wishes of the owner and/or creator of that "data" were not respected by the people doing the taking.
Copyright is the double-edged sword in this case.
It protects our right to GPL our source as much as it protects RIAA's right to claim ownership of an arrangement of pleasing sounds.
Under the current system, you can't have one without the other - and getting offended by one abuse of copyrighted material without getting offended by the other is hypocritical.
(I'm feeling pretty good about this one, as I'm offended by both abuses.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414725</id>
	<title>Release the hounds!</title>
	<author>bXTr</author>
	<datestamp>1245588720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A number of earlier, one-line, 5-star reviews -- expressed in a similar style -- sound suspiciously like astroturfing.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Meanwhile, one of our upright citizens took the initiative and created a user account on <a href="http://www.sothinkmedia.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1479" title="sothinkmedia.com" rel="nofollow">Sothink's forum</a> [sothinkmedia.com] today just to post a link to this very article on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. On behalf of FOSS users everywhere, let me congratulate you on helping to enforce those negative stereotypes about us that hang like an albatross around our neck. Thanks a lot, bud.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A number of earlier , one-line , 5-star reviews -- expressed in a similar style -- sound suspiciously like astroturfing .
Meanwhile , one of our upright citizens took the initiative and created a user account on Sothink 's forum [ sothinkmedia.com ] today just to post a link to this very article on / .
On behalf of FOSS users everywhere , let me congratulate you on helping to enforce those negative stereotypes about us that hang like an albatross around our neck .
Thanks a lot , bud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A number of earlier, one-line, 5-star reviews -- expressed in a similar style -- sound suspiciously like astroturfing.
Meanwhile, one of our upright citizens took the initiative and created a user account on Sothink's forum [sothinkmedia.com] today just to post a link to this very article on /.
On behalf of FOSS users everywhere, let me congratulate you on helping to enforce those negative stereotypes about us that hang like an albatross around our neck.
Thanks a lot, bud.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413223</id>
	<title>Re:GPL or not, doesn't matter.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245576180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development. And I don't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew. Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games, generally poisons the homebrew community, divides it due to the differing opinions on it, and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all.</p></div><p>Okay, boo on those trying to scam the ignorant, but I can't see why any of that made you quit. You still made the software you made, it was still available just like you wanted it. Is it purely an ego thing, not wanting to be associated with scammers and pirates?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development .
And I do n't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew .
Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games , generally poisons the homebrew community , divides it due to the differing opinions on it , and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all.Okay , boo on those trying to scam the ignorant , but I ca n't see why any of that made you quit .
You still made the software you made , it was still available just like you wanted it .
Is it purely an ego thing , not wanting to be associated with scammers and pirates ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the reasons why I gave up on Wii development.
And I don't have plans to touch any console or system where piracy might become a big incentive to run homebrew.
Piracy brings in hordes of clueless idiots who just want free games, generally poisons the homebrew community, divides it due to the differing opinions on it, and also comes with dollar-eyed scammers who want to make a quick buck of it all.Okay, boo on those trying to scam the ignorant, but I can't see why any of that made you quit.
You still made the software you made, it was still available just like you wanted it.
Is it purely an ego thing, not wanting to be associated with scammers and pirates?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28449857</id>
	<title>They're apparently GPL-compliant now.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245873660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just got the latest news from their Twitter. They wrote:<br>Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3, which is licensed under The GNU General Public License.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just got the latest news from their Twitter .
They wrote : Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3 , which is licensed under The GNU General Public License .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just got the latest news from their Twitter.
They wrote:Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox released version 5.3, which is licensed under The GNU General Public License.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413797</id>
	<title>Stop perpetuating the incorrect use of the word!</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1245580680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It has been this way a long time too, stealing cable started in the 70s.</p></div><p>So that's when the "stealing by copying" bullshit started. I'd rather kill off the incorrect use of the word than try to justify it with the "been happening a long time now" excuse.
<br> <br>
Yes language evolves, but this isn't evolution, it's corruption by those with a vested interest.
<br> <br>
As the GP said, this is copyright infrigement and plagiarism, not stealing. If someone made a clone of you without your permission, would it be murder?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has been this way a long time too , stealing cable started in the 70s.So that 's when the " stealing by copying " bullshit started .
I 'd rather kill off the incorrect use of the word than try to justify it with the " been happening a long time now " excuse .
Yes language evolves , but this is n't evolution , it 's corruption by those with a vested interest .
As the GP said , this is copyright infrigement and plagiarism , not stealing .
If someone made a clone of you without your permission , would it be murder ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has been this way a long time too, stealing cable started in the 70s.So that's when the "stealing by copying" bullshit started.
I'd rather kill off the incorrect use of the word than try to justify it with the "been happening a long time now" excuse.
Yes language evolves, but this isn't evolution, it's corruption by those with a vested interest.
As the GP said, this is copyright infrigement and plagiarism, not stealing.
If someone made a clone of you without your permission, would it be murder?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867</id>
	<title>And how is th different from the RIAA and MPAA ??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inquiringmindswanttoknow !!</p><p>If it's okay to download movies and CDs and herpes, what is all the hoopla about gpl ??  Either it's okay to STEAL or it's not okay.  If you want it both ways, just say you're BI and get on with the rest of your life.</p><p>Fact is, NO CODE WAS STOLEN !!  It still exists right where it was before.  Only, maybe, somebody has a COPY of this.  NOTHING WAS LOST !!  IP is a figment if COPYRIGHT HOLDERS imaginations !!  NOTHING TO SEE HERE !! Move along !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inquiringmindswanttoknow !
! If it 's okay to download movies and CDs and herpes , what is all the hoopla about gpl ? ?
Either it 's okay to STEAL or it 's not okay .
If you want it both ways , just say you 're BI and get on with the rest of your life.Fact is , NO CODE WAS STOLEN ! !
It still exists right where it was before .
Only , maybe , somebody has a COPY of this .
NOTHING WAS LOST ! !
IP is a figment if COPYRIGHT HOLDERS imaginations ! !
NOTHING TO SEE HERE ! !
Move along !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inquiringmindswanttoknow !
!If it's okay to download movies and CDs and herpes, what is all the hoopla about gpl ??
Either it's okay to STEAL or it's not okay.
If you want it both ways, just say you're BI and get on with the rest of your life.Fact is, NO CODE WAS STOLEN !!
It still exists right where it was before.
Only, maybe, somebody has a COPY of this.
NOTHING WAS LOST !!
IP is a figment if COPYRIGHT HOLDERS imaginations !!
NOTHING TO SEE HERE !!
Move along !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412661</id>
	<title>Cheap shot at GPL... ignoramous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245614880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To quote the quote;

"This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences."

Bullshit. Show your source. The advantage here with open source... violators can easily be found. Since the code is GPL there is zero risk of legal repercussions.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To quote the quote ; " This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work , pass it off as their own , never acknowledge or give credit , and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences .
" Bullshit .
Show your source .
The advantage here with open source... violators can easily be found .
Since the code is GPL there is zero risk of legal repercussions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To quote the quote;

"This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.
"

Bullshit.
Show your source.
The advantage here with open source... violators can easily be found.
Since the code is GPL there is zero risk of legal repercussions.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414837</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>dov\_0</author>
	<datestamp>1245589680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One useful attack vector is to vote for the bug report concerning the violation at bugzilla. Anyone with a Bugzilla userID can do that. It's the squeaky hinge that gets the oil after all. If they can no longer distribute their dodgy package through Mozilla, they're pretty much done for anyway as far as SoThink is concerned.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One useful attack vector is to vote for the bug report concerning the violation at bugzilla .
Anyone with a Bugzilla userID can do that .
It 's the squeaky hinge that gets the oil after all .
If they can no longer distribute their dodgy package through Mozilla , they 're pretty much done for anyway as far as SoThink is concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One useful attack vector is to vote for the bug report concerning the violation at bugzilla.
Anyone with a Bugzilla userID can do that.
It's the squeaky hinge that gets the oil after all.
If they can no longer distribute their dodgy package through Mozilla, they're pretty much done for anyway as far as SoThink is concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412925</id>
	<title>Underestimation</title>
	<author>FrankDrebin</author>
	<datestamp>1245616860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work...</p></div></blockquote><p>
That's rather a bold statement.  It might even be true if there were no possible redress.  But publicizing the wrongdoing and ousting the offenders is quite a powerful part of the community.  Of course any similarly-wronged author, proprietary or open-source, also has the law on their side.  Hardly an abject situation.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work.. . That 's rather a bold statement .
It might even be true if there were no possible redress .
But publicizing the wrongdoing and ousting the offenders is quite a powerful part of the community .
Of course any similarly-wronged author , proprietary or open-source , also has the law on their side .
Hardly an abject situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work...
That's rather a bold statement.
It might even be true if there were no possible redress.
But publicizing the wrongdoing and ousting the offenders is quite a powerful part of the community.
Of course any similarly-wronged author, proprietary or open-source, also has the law on their side.
Hardly an abject situation.

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413765</id>
	<title>Re:Sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When the RIAA is the victim, the uploaders are not claiming to have written the song themselves.  In this case, the infringing programmers are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When the RIAA is the victim , the uploaders are not claiming to have written the song themselves .
In this case , the infringing programmers are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When the RIAA is the victim, the uploaders are not claiming to have written the song themselves.
In this case, the infringing programmers are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413423</id>
	<title>unzip sothink.xpi?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Afaik, all firefox extensions are just zipped javascript files, therefore it is impossible to violate the gpl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Afaik , all firefox extensions are just zipped javascript files , therefore it is impossible to violate the gpl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Afaik, all firefox extensions are just zipped javascript files, therefore it is impossible to violate the gpl.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413013</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245617520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I also thought that this was a very false and stupid statement.</p><p>I will <em>not</em> stop contributing, just because someone steals my credit. First I will ask him friendly and fairly, that I think what he did is wrong, that I want it fixed, and that we should work it out. (Ex clarify misunderstandings.) But when he is ignoring me for too long, acting stubborn, or just being an asshole, I will kick his ass. Hard. I then have no problem with suing him, driving over there and storming the building, or DDOSing his servers, if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong. (But not when I have any doubt.)</p><p>Stopping contribution because of something like this is weak and proof of a poor character, that caves on aggressive dominant others. We are by far not all like that.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I also thought that this was a very false and stupid statement.I will not stop contributing , just because someone steals my credit .
First I will ask him friendly and fairly , that I think what he did is wrong , that I want it fixed , and that we should work it out .
( Ex clarify misunderstandings .
) But when he is ignoring me for too long , acting stubborn , or just being an asshole , I will kick his ass .
Hard. I then have no problem with suing him , driving over there and storming the building , or DDOSing his servers , if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong .
( But not when I have any doubt .
) Stopping contribution because of something like this is weak and proof of a poor character , that caves on aggressive dominant others .
We are by far not all like that .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also thought that this was a very false and stupid statement.I will not stop contributing, just because someone steals my credit.
First I will ask him friendly and fairly, that I think what he did is wrong, that I want it fixed, and that we should work it out.
(Ex clarify misunderstandings.
) But when he is ignoring me for too long, acting stubborn, or just being an asshole, I will kick his ass.
Hard. I then have no problem with suing him, driving over there and storming the building, or DDOSing his servers, if I have fair proof that what he did was illegal/wrong.
(But not when I have any doubt.
)Stopping contribution because of something like this is weak and proof of a poor character, that caves on aggressive dominant others.
We are by far not all like that.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421101</id>
	<title>My Own Review</title>
	<author>Toad-san</author>
	<datestamp>1245682080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just entered my own review at the Sotthink site.  I don't think they'll be happy.</p><p>"You \_have\_ read the Slashdot entry about your plagiarism [cough theft cough], right?  Do you plan to respond, to defend the accusations that you stole code?  Or will we just conclude you're the thieving GPL violating SOBs you appear to be?"</p><p>I suppose they might even sue me.</p><p>[shrug]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just entered my own review at the Sotthink site .
I do n't think they 'll be happy .
" You \ _have \ _ read the Slashdot entry about your plagiarism [ cough theft cough ] , right ?
Do you plan to respond , to defend the accusations that you stole code ?
Or will we just conclude you 're the thieving GPL violating SOBs you appear to be ?
" I suppose they might even sue me .
[ shrug ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just entered my own review at the Sotthink site.
I don't think they'll be happy.
"You \_have\_ read the Slashdot entry about your plagiarism [cough theft cough], right?
Do you plan to respond, to defend the accusations that you stole code?
Or will we just conclude you're the thieving GPL violating SOBs you appear to be?
"I suppose they might even sue me.
[shrug]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417079</id>
	<title>Re:Lots of ffmpeg gpl violations</title>
	<author>tkw954</author>
	<datestamp>1245608220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
ffmpeg keeps a "Hall of shame" for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.</p></div></blockquote><p>

I saw KMPlayer on the list of software not in compliance with the license and my jaw nearly hit the floor.  KDE doesn't respcet the LGPL? What?!? However, it appears that KMPlayer on the hall of shame is the Kang Media Player at www.kmplayer.<b>com</b>, not the KDE mplayer frontend at www.kmplayer.kde.<b>org</b>. That was a close one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They tend to fall into two camps , those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license ; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they 've followed it .
ffmpeg keeps a " Hall of shame " for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added .
I saw KMPlayer on the list of software not in compliance with the license and my jaw nearly hit the floor .
KDE does n't respcet the LGPL ?
What ? ! ? However , it appears that KMPlayer on the hall of shame is the Kang Media Player at www.kmplayer.com , not the KDE mplayer frontend at www.kmplayer.kde.org .
That was a close one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They tend to fall into two camps, those who attempt to use the lgpl parts of ffmpeg and publish the license; and those who outright ignore the gpl or pretend they've followed it.
ffmpeg keeps a "Hall of shame" for these violaters but sothinkmedia have not yet been added.
I saw KMPlayer on the list of software not in compliance with the license and my jaw nearly hit the floor.
KDE doesn't respcet the LGPL?
What?!? However, it appears that KMPlayer on the hall of shame is the Kang Media Player at www.kmplayer.com, not the KDE mplayer frontend at www.kmplayer.kde.org.
That was a close one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763</id>
	<title>Stop complaining, babies.</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1245615780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.</p></div><p>This is not a bad thing. It's a good thing. It's a good thing that code can be borrowed from one program and used in another. Why re-invent the wheel after all? I thought that's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit, but because we want to share our work with the world.
</p><p>The crime here is not that one programmer "stole" the work of another. The crime is that one programmer took advantage of an open resource, but kept their modifications closed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work , pass it off as their own , never acknowledge or give credit , and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.This is not a bad thing .
It 's a good thing .
It 's a good thing that code can be borrowed from one program and used in another .
Why re-invent the wheel after all ?
I thought that 's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit , but because we want to share our work with the world .
The crime here is not that one programmer " stole " the work of another .
The crime is that one programmer took advantage of an open resource , but kept their modifications closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why most good programmers will stop contributing to the global community because there are those who will steal their work, pass it off as their own, never acknowledge or give credit, and then shamefully stick their head in the sand and ignore the consequences.This is not a bad thing.
It's a good thing.
It's a good thing that code can be borrowed from one program and used in another.
Why re-invent the wheel after all?
I thought that's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit, but because we want to share our work with the world.
The crime here is not that one programmer "stole" the work of another.
The crime is that one programmer took advantage of an open resource, but kept their modifications closed.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413801</id>
	<title>the hart of many problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hi,</p><p>And again an outcry of wrong doing, regarding knowledge, copyright ( or left), patents, in fact wordings ( I mean in a way communication, or reason, the fact human race says distinguishes us from animals, although everybody has to face the fact we are one ). In the old days, every idea, story, or just an artistic expression, was regarded with praise and subsequent reward. The base ground, always granted by leaders or majority, because we humans are like sheep ( although many claim we are so much more intelligent, it does not always prove that way ), contradictory I know, but yet prove me wrong. We do follow power, may it be strength, intelligence, charisma or EQ, resolving in personal gain, like social status or material, or being the minority which has the potential to grow to be the majority. It has never meant to let individuals OWN ideas, thoughts, deductions, expressions of the wordings ( as explained above), but yes always was meant to govern them, and in that sense we stripe or give as a community.<br>Is this case is it special? No happens all the time. Is it special then? Yes, it caught attention because it was proven not original by the same mechanisms, knowledge, copyright (or left) patents, in fact wordings ( mmmmmmm discussion here, in a sense expression in base form, what is base after 25000 years of evolution, non biblical sense ), the spartan way, there's nothing wrong with wrong doing (even if the wrong is arbitrary), unless you get caught. There's democracy for you, or public openness.<br>So my point as a sysadmin/programmer/manager, one time would be musician, be glad the world knows your work, and can attach your name to it (history fades, I don't think Bach or Mozart would care, but I'd like to think they smile knowing their work played with and without recognition ), but do not try to own that, because you are a expression of what was and what is to come, just make a living telling the story so he future might know and learn.</p><p>greetz,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hi,And again an outcry of wrong doing , regarding knowledge , copyright ( or left ) , patents , in fact wordings ( I mean in a way communication , or reason , the fact human race says distinguishes us from animals , although everybody has to face the fact we are one ) .
In the old days , every idea , story , or just an artistic expression , was regarded with praise and subsequent reward .
The base ground , always granted by leaders or majority , because we humans are like sheep ( although many claim we are so much more intelligent , it does not always prove that way ) , contradictory I know , but yet prove me wrong .
We do follow power , may it be strength , intelligence , charisma or EQ , resolving in personal gain , like social status or material , or being the minority which has the potential to grow to be the majority .
It has never meant to let individuals OWN ideas , thoughts , deductions , expressions of the wordings ( as explained above ) , but yes always was meant to govern them , and in that sense we stripe or give as a community.Is this case is it special ?
No happens all the time .
Is it special then ?
Yes , it caught attention because it was proven not original by the same mechanisms , knowledge , copyright ( or left ) patents , in fact wordings ( mmmmmmm discussion here , in a sense expression in base form , what is base after 25000 years of evolution , non biblical sense ) , the spartan way , there 's nothing wrong with wrong doing ( even if the wrong is arbitrary ) , unless you get caught .
There 's democracy for you , or public openness.So my point as a sysadmin/programmer/manager , one time would be musician , be glad the world knows your work , and can attach your name to it ( history fades , I do n't think Bach or Mozart would care , but I 'd like to think they smile knowing their work played with and without recognition ) , but do not try to own that , because you are a expression of what was and what is to come , just make a living telling the story so he future might know and learn.greetz,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hi,And again an outcry of wrong doing, regarding knowledge, copyright ( or left), patents, in fact wordings ( I mean in a way communication, or reason, the fact human race says distinguishes us from animals, although everybody has to face the fact we are one ).
In the old days, every idea, story, or just an artistic expression, was regarded with praise and subsequent reward.
The base ground, always granted by leaders or majority, because we humans are like sheep ( although many claim we are so much more intelligent, it does not always prove that way ), contradictory I know, but yet prove me wrong.
We do follow power, may it be strength, intelligence, charisma or EQ, resolving in personal gain, like social status or material, or being the minority which has the potential to grow to be the majority.
It has never meant to let individuals OWN ideas, thoughts, deductions, expressions of the wordings ( as explained above), but yes always was meant to govern them, and in that sense we stripe or give as a community.Is this case is it special?
No happens all the time.
Is it special then?
Yes, it caught attention because it was proven not original by the same mechanisms, knowledge, copyright (or left) patents, in fact wordings ( mmmmmmm discussion here, in a sense expression in base form, what is base after 25000 years of evolution, non biblical sense ), the spartan way, there's nothing wrong with wrong doing (even if the wrong is arbitrary), unless you get caught.
There's democracy for you, or public openness.So my point as a sysadmin/programmer/manager, one time would be musician, be glad the world knows your work, and can attach your name to it (history fades, I don't think Bach or Mozart would care, but I'd like to think they smile knowing their work played with and without recognition ), but do not try to own that, because you are a expression of what was and what is to come, just make a living telling the story so he future might know and learn.greetz,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417279</id>
	<title>Just checking the facts.</title>
	<author>Kickasso</author>
	<datestamp>1245609960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>/me being new here and all.</p><p>FlashGot developer sez:</p><blockquote><div><p>Just compare their components/SWVDService.js file with FlashGot's components/flashgotService.js (identical to FG 1.1.9), or search for "flashgot" or even "maone" in their files.</p></div></blockquote><p>There's no components/SWVDService.js in their code, nor there is any mention of "flashgot" or "maone". We perhaps need a more up-to-date version of the claim.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>/me being new here and all.FlashGot developer sez : Just compare their components/SWVDService.js file with FlashGot 's components/flashgotService.js ( identical to FG 1.1.9 ) , or search for " flashgot " or even " maone " in their files.There 's no components/SWVDService.js in their code , nor there is any mention of " flashgot " or " maone " .
We perhaps need a more up-to-date version of the claim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>/me being new here and all.FlashGot developer sez:Just compare their components/SWVDService.js file with FlashGot's components/flashgotService.js (identical to FG 1.1.9), or search for "flashgot" or even "maone" in their files.There's no components/SWVDService.js in their code, nor there is any mention of "flashgot" or "maone".
We perhaps need a more up-to-date version of the claim.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412657</id>
	<title>RIAA</title>
	<author>arizwebfoot</author>
	<datestamp>1245614880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sic the RIAA on them, then they'll have to pay a million bucks too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sic the RIAA on them , then they 'll have to pay a million bucks too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sic the RIAA on them, then they'll have to pay a million bucks too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414419</id>
	<title>How can you "steal" code?</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1245586020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm curious. When people discuss illegal downloads via bittorrent or other P2P, numerous pedants jump on anyone who dares say the downloads are "stealing" music. They are quick to point out that making copies doesn't deprive the copyright owner of his song, unlike the situation when someone, say, steals a car. Calling downloading "stealing" is just propaganda from the RIAA to brainwash people, yadda yadda yadda.</p><p>Interesting how the same standard doesn't apply when the copied item is source code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm curious .
When people discuss illegal downloads via bittorrent or other P2P , numerous pedants jump on anyone who dares say the downloads are " stealing " music .
They are quick to point out that making copies does n't deprive the copyright owner of his song , unlike the situation when someone , say , steals a car .
Calling downloading " stealing " is just propaganda from the RIAA to brainwash people , yadda yadda yadda.Interesting how the same standard does n't apply when the copied item is source code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm curious.
When people discuss illegal downloads via bittorrent or other P2P, numerous pedants jump on anyone who dares say the downloads are "stealing" music.
They are quick to point out that making copies doesn't deprive the copyright owner of his song, unlike the situation when someone, say, steals a car.
Calling downloading "stealing" is just propaganda from the RIAA to brainwash people, yadda yadda yadda.Interesting how the same standard doesn't apply when the copied item is source code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413919</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>El Icaro</author>
	<datestamp>1245581640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Still, both are wrong. <br>
&nbsp; <br>Saying it's better/"more favorable to our freedoms" to download music than having large corporations preform some illegal activity is retarded. <br>
&nbsp; <br>The fact is simply that larger corporations/industries have the resources to prosecute "the little guys" and we're just butthurt we can't get back at them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Still , both are wrong .
  Saying it 's better/ " more favorable to our freedoms " to download music than having large corporations preform some illegal activity is retarded .
  The fact is simply that larger corporations/industries have the resources to prosecute " the little guys " and we 're just butthurt we ca n't get back at them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Still, both are wrong.
  Saying it's better/"more favorable to our freedoms" to download music than having large corporations preform some illegal activity is retarded.
  The fact is simply that larger corporations/industries have the resources to prosecute "the little guys" and we're just butthurt we can't get back at them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567</id>
	<title>Someone used my "free" software, kill them!</title>
	<author>BlueKitties</author>
	<datestamp>1245578760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the reasons I've never been a fan of the GPL -- you can use GPL code and get in trouble over it; software isn't truly free until anyone can use it freely, without worrying about legal trouble. The forced reciprocation, IMHO, has hurt the open source movement severely. Companies actually have good reason to fear "free" GPL software, because unlike speech, GPL comes with strings attached.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the reasons I 've never been a fan of the GPL -- you can use GPL code and get in trouble over it ; software is n't truly free until anyone can use it freely , without worrying about legal trouble .
The forced reciprocation , IMHO , has hurt the open source movement severely .
Companies actually have good reason to fear " free " GPL software , because unlike speech , GPL comes with strings attached .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the reasons I've never been a fan of the GPL -- you can use GPL code and get in trouble over it; software isn't truly free until anyone can use it freely, without worrying about legal trouble.
The forced reciprocation, IMHO, has hurt the open source movement severely.
Companies actually have good reason to fear "free" GPL software, because unlike speech, GPL comes with strings attached.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413773</id>
	<title>Use the De Raadt Method</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But, but, but, he didn't mean to and you're calling him a thief!!!! You have no understanding of how humans operate!  You stupid, nooby asshole!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But , but , but , he did n't mean to and you 're calling him a thief ! ! ! !
You have no understanding of how humans operate !
You stupid , nooby asshole !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But, but, but, he didn't mean to and you're calling him a thief!!!!
You have no understanding of how humans operate!
You stupid, nooby asshole!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417657</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1245613440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin.</i> <br> <br>Copyright law does not require an infringer to be making money off it. They could still be liable for huge "statutory damages".<br> <br> <i>I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action</i> <br> <br>The most obvious action would be a DMCA takedown notice to mozilla.net and wherever else SoThink is hawking this software.<br> <br> <i>but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code.</i> <br> <br>According to the article he has already tried "asking nicely" (and been ignored) so taking some kind of legal action would appear to be approproiate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , there have been a few recent cases ( BusyBox ) where the company is making money off of it but I do n't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin .
Copyright law does not require an infringer to be making money off it .
They could still be liable for huge " statutory damages " .
I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action The most obvious action would be a DMCA takedown notice to mozilla.net and wherever else SoThink is hawking this software .
but instead of opting to sue SoThink , I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code .
According to the article he has already tried " asking nicely " ( and been ignored ) so taking some kind of legal action would appear to be approproiate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin.
Copyright law does not require an infringer to be making money off it.
They could still be liable for huge "statutory damages".
I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action  The most obvious action would be a DMCA takedown notice to mozilla.net and wherever else SoThink is hawking this software.
but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL if it is tangled into his code or at least realease all the modifications they have done to his code.
According to the article he has already tried "asking nicely" (and been ignored) so taking some kind of legal action would appear to be approproiate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417285</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1245610020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it'd be the Unix Wars all over again. And just like last time, there'll come a system that promises some degree of standardization, and everyone will jump ship to it while the old companies die along with their 'trade secrets'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it 'd be the Unix Wars all over again .
And just like last time , there 'll come a system that promises some degree of standardization , and everyone will jump ship to it while the old companies die along with their 'trade secrets' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it'd be the Unix Wars all over again.
And just like last time, there'll come a system that promises some degree of standardization, and everyone will jump ship to it while the old companies die along with their 'trade secrets'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412865</id>
	<title>At least give the right URL to "slashdot"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok here is the correct URL to slashdot <a href="http://www.sothinkmedia.com/" title="sothinkmedia.com" rel="nofollow">Sothink</a> [sothinkmedia.com]. Don't bother the Mozilla server linkeded above.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok here is the correct URL to slashdot Sothink [ sothinkmedia.com ] .
Do n't bother the Mozilla server linkeded above .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok here is the correct URL to slashdot Sothink [sothinkmedia.com].
Don't bother the Mozilla server linkeded above.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021</id>
	<title>Not to throw cold water on the outrage...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245617580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but has the copyright owner confirmed that this was not done with permission?  I doubt that it was, but you really should make sure before making accusations of copyright infringement.  After all, enforcement is entirely up to the copyright owner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but has the copyright owner confirmed that this was not done with permission ?
I doubt that it was , but you really should make sure before making accusations of copyright infringement .
After all , enforcement is entirely up to the copyright owner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but has the copyright owner confirmed that this was not done with permission?
I doubt that it was, but you really should make sure before making accusations of copyright infringement.
After all, enforcement is entirely up to the copyright owner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414045</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245582540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I see your point, so I propose that the damages in each case should be based on the amount of money the offender has made from their use of the copied item. That would let Jammie off the hook anyway, since I suspect that she has not made a penny from sharing anyone elses work</p><p>Incidently, does the percentage of the work that is in violation matter? Surely the question is whether or not the work would function without it? If they ommitted the GPL work, they would be legitimate, and if it does not work without it that would be their problem, just as it would be mine if I wrote some commercial software that was dependent on Microsoft libraries and didn't want to comply with their license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I see your point , so I propose that the damages in each case should be based on the amount of money the offender has made from their use of the copied item .
That would let Jammie off the hook anyway , since I suspect that she has not made a penny from sharing anyone elses workIncidently , does the percentage of the work that is in violation matter ?
Surely the question is whether or not the work would function without it ?
If they ommitted the GPL work , they would be legitimate , and if it does not work without it that would be their problem , just as it would be mine if I wrote some commercial software that was dependent on Microsoft libraries and did n't want to comply with their license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see your point, so I propose that the damages in each case should be based on the amount of money the offender has made from their use of the copied item.
That would let Jammie off the hook anyway, since I suspect that she has not made a penny from sharing anyone elses workIncidently, does the percentage of the work that is in violation matter?
Surely the question is whether or not the work would function without it?
If they ommitted the GPL work, they would be legitimate, and if it does not work without it that would be their problem, just as it would be mine if I wrote some commercial software that was dependent on Microsoft libraries and didn't want to comply with their license.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413445</id>
	<title>Re:Not to throw cold water on the outrage...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245577800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course he has.  From one of the linked pages, Giorgio wrote (emphasis <b>his</b>):</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm quite mad at those idiots: they're <b>illegally and brainlessly</b> reusing the main components of FlashGot 1.1.9...I said "illegally" because FlashGot is open sourced under the GPL license, and this means that anybody incorporating code from FlashGot (which is otherwise freely reusable) <b>must release their code/modifications under the GPL as well</b>, which they're not doing...</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course he has .
From one of the linked pages , Giorgio wrote ( emphasis his ) : I 'm quite mad at those idiots : they 're illegally and brainlessly reusing the main components of FlashGot 1.1.9...I said " illegally " because FlashGot is open sourced under the GPL license , and this means that anybody incorporating code from FlashGot ( which is otherwise freely reusable ) must release their code/modifications under the GPL as well , which they 're not doing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course he has.
From one of the linked pages, Giorgio wrote (emphasis his):I'm quite mad at those idiots: they're illegally and brainlessly reusing the main components of FlashGot 1.1.9...I said "illegally" because FlashGot is open sourced under the GPL license, and this means that anybody incorporating code from FlashGot (which is otherwise freely reusable) must release their code/modifications under the GPL as well, which they're not doing...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413371</id>
	<title>Re:Stop complaining, babies.</title>
	<author>Vellmont</author>
	<datestamp>1245577380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>I thought that's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit, but because we want to share our work with the world.<br></i><br>I think there's a lot of different reasons people write open source software.  That's the core reason there's so many different versions of open source licenses.  Some people DO write it for credit and feel cheated when it's not given.</p><p>The rest of your post I agree with.  The original author calling this "stealing" adds nothing to the argument, and only serves to inflame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought that 's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit , but because we want to share our work with the world.I think there 's a lot of different reasons people write open source software .
That 's the core reason there 's so many different versions of open source licenses .
Some people DO write it for credit and feel cheated when it 's not given.The rest of your post I agree with .
The original author calling this " stealing " adds nothing to the argument , and only serves to inflame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought that's why we wrote open source software - not to receive credit, but because we want to share our work with the world.I think there's a lot of different reasons people write open source software.
That's the core reason there's so many different versions of open source licenses.
Some people DO write it for credit and feel cheated when it's not given.The rest of your post I agree with.
The original author calling this "stealing" adds nothing to the argument, and only serves to inflame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416445</id>
	<title>What license?</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1245603420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The GPL also specifies that derivative works (such as Sothink) must be distributed under the same license.  What is the Sothink license?  Can anyone find that out (I am having some trouble finding the exact license...)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The GPL also specifies that derivative works ( such as Sothink ) must be distributed under the same license .
What is the Sothink license ?
Can anyone find that out ( I am having some trouble finding the exact license... ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GPL also specifies that derivative works (such as Sothink) must be distributed under the same license.
What is the Sothink license?
Can anyone find that out (I am having some trouble finding the exact license...)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412959</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1245617100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"I really don't agree with that sentiment. I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin."</p></div></blockquote><p> <b> <i> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BusyBox" title="wikipedia.org">BusyBox</a> [wikipedia.org] </i> </b>???  You mean the GPL'd small footprint re-write of various UNIX/Linux utilities for use in embedded systems that is now, and has always been GPL'd?  The same company that has successfully sued numerous companies for GPL violation, and was the <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/sep/20/busybox/" title="softwarefreedom.org">first to bring one in a US court</a> [softwarefreedom.org]?  I think you are confused.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I really do n't agree with that sentiment .
I mean , there have been a few recent cases ( BusyBox ) where the company is making money off of it but I do n't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin .
" BusyBox [ wikipedia.org ] ? ? ?
You mean the GPL 'd small footprint re-write of various UNIX/Linux utilities for use in embedded systems that is now , and has always been GPL 'd ?
The same company that has successfully sued numerous companies for GPL violation , and was the first to bring one in a US court [ softwarefreedom.org ] ?
I think you are confused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I really don't agree with that sentiment.
I mean, there have been a few recent cases (BusyBox) where the company is making money off of it but I don't think SoThink is making a ton of cash off of their plugin.
"   BusyBox [wikipedia.org]  ???
You mean the GPL'd small footprint re-write of various UNIX/Linux utilities for use in embedded systems that is now, and has always been GPL'd?
The same company that has successfully sued numerous companies for GPL violation, and was the first to bring one in a US court [softwarefreedom.org]?
I think you are confused.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413151</id>
	<title>Re:RIAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245575580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you kidding?  There's absolutely no double standard here, and I'm sure everybody agrees that they should get fined 80,000 times the retail price of that GPL code in order to punish them.  After all, no doubt everybody here agrees that copyright infringement equals theft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you kidding ?
There 's absolutely no double standard here , and I 'm sure everybody agrees that they should get fined 80,000 times the retail price of that GPL code in order to punish them .
After all , no doubt everybody here agrees that copyright infringement equals theft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you kidding?
There's absolutely no double standard here, and I'm sure everybody agrees that they should get fined 80,000 times the retail price of that GPL code in order to punish them.
After all, no doubt everybody here agrees that copyright infringement equals theft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412657</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413979</id>
	<title>anonymous cowardon</title>
	<author>spandex\_panda</author>
	<datestamp>1245582060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dead Slashdot. Please put the space back in between "anonymous coward" and "on" it is not posted by "anonymous cowardon at 12:00" damn fools!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dead Slashdot .
Please put the space back in between " anonymous coward " and " on " it is not posted by " anonymous cowardon at 12 : 00 " damn fools !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dead Slashdot.
Please put the space back in between "anonymous coward" and "on" it is not posted by "anonymous cowardon at 12:00" damn fools!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413119</id>
	<title>FlashGot = NoScript Malware Author</title>
	<author>NoName Studios</author>
	<datestamp>1245575280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FlashGot is made by the same author that writes NoScript.  The same NoScript that had malicious code that interfered with AdBlock Plus' functionality.

Karma is a bitch, basically.  I am really not feeling any sympathy for him.

Flame on!</htmltext>
<tokenext>FlashGot is made by the same author that writes NoScript .
The same NoScript that had malicious code that interfered with AdBlock Plus ' functionality .
Karma is a bitch , basically .
I am really not feeling any sympathy for him .
Flame on !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FlashGot is made by the same author that writes NoScript.
The same NoScript that had malicious code that interfered with AdBlock Plus' functionality.
Karma is a bitch, basically.
I am really not feeling any sympathy for him.
Flame on!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415771</id>
	<title>Re:Illegal Copyleft Infringement.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245598920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stealing credit for a digital artifact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stealing credit for a digital artifact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stealing credit for a digital artifact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413837</id>
	<title>GPL encurages violation, discurages contribution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245580980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ShineTheLight muses that people will take another person's work, without credit, and pass it off as their own.  I would propose the GPL encourages this type of behavior rather then discourages it.</p><p>By creating a license model that is so legally toxic, the GPL pushes code reuse underground.  Even if the copier wanted to give credit or contribute code back to the community, they could not because to do so would be to effectively sign a legal confession that they are using the original code at all.  The effect of the GPL is that it says, "Give us every last byte of your code, hide all of it underground, or completely reinvent the wheel from scratch (which may cost you your job if you don't have enough time)".  It's only reasonable that someone put in such a position would simply choose to hide the infraction.</p><p>In sharp contrast the BSD license encourage compliance, credit, and open contributions by throwing away the GPL's ridiculous assumption that "whatever is mine is mine and whatever is yours is mine too".  Developers <i>want</i> to give proper credit; Adopting code from respected sources is a display of intelligence in software, and showing respect by giving credit gains mutual respect.  Developers <i>want</i> to contribute code; Show and tell to the world again, is a time honored way of displaying skill and gaining respect.  The GPL however, puts developers into an entirely unreasonable position with no good answer (no, drinking the koolaid is not a reasonable answer most of the time) and so forces developers to take the least unreasonable of the available (practical) options.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ShineTheLight muses that people will take another person 's work , without credit , and pass it off as their own .
I would propose the GPL encourages this type of behavior rather then discourages it.By creating a license model that is so legally toxic , the GPL pushes code reuse underground .
Even if the copier wanted to give credit or contribute code back to the community , they could not because to do so would be to effectively sign a legal confession that they are using the original code at all .
The effect of the GPL is that it says , " Give us every last byte of your code , hide all of it underground , or completely reinvent the wheel from scratch ( which may cost you your job if you do n't have enough time ) " .
It 's only reasonable that someone put in such a position would simply choose to hide the infraction.In sharp contrast the BSD license encourage compliance , credit , and open contributions by throwing away the GPL 's ridiculous assumption that " whatever is mine is mine and whatever is yours is mine too " .
Developers want to give proper credit ; Adopting code from respected sources is a display of intelligence in software , and showing respect by giving credit gains mutual respect .
Developers want to contribute code ; Show and tell to the world again , is a time honored way of displaying skill and gaining respect .
The GPL however , puts developers into an entirely unreasonable position with no good answer ( no , drinking the koolaid is not a reasonable answer most of the time ) and so forces developers to take the least unreasonable of the available ( practical ) options .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ShineTheLight muses that people will take another person's work, without credit, and pass it off as their own.
I would propose the GPL encourages this type of behavior rather then discourages it.By creating a license model that is so legally toxic, the GPL pushes code reuse underground.
Even if the copier wanted to give credit or contribute code back to the community, they could not because to do so would be to effectively sign a legal confession that they are using the original code at all.
The effect of the GPL is that it says, "Give us every last byte of your code, hide all of it underground, or completely reinvent the wheel from scratch (which may cost you your job if you don't have enough time)".
It's only reasonable that someone put in such a position would simply choose to hide the infraction.In sharp contrast the BSD license encourage compliance, credit, and open contributions by throwing away the GPL's ridiculous assumption that "whatever is mine is mine and whatever is yours is mine too".
Developers want to give proper credit; Adopting code from respected sources is a display of intelligence in software, and showing respect by giving credit gains mutual respect.
Developers want to contribute code; Show and tell to the world again, is a time honored way of displaying skill and gaining respect.
The GPL however, puts developers into an entirely unreasonable position with no good answer (no, drinking the koolaid is not a reasonable answer most of the time) and so forces developers to take the least unreasonable of the available (practical) options.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28418935</id>
	<title>Re:This IS A GPL VIOLATION.</title>
	<author>nadaou</author>
	<datestamp>1245668220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery,</p></div></blockquote><p>No it doesn't. It requires that you ship the offer of code with the binary.</p><p>Please actually <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.txt" title="gnu.org">read the thing</a> [gnu.org] before making ADAMANT BUT COMPLETELY WRONG CLAIMS IN ALL CAPS.<br>That goes for moderators too, at least those sucked in by posters relying on authoritative sounding claims.</p><blockquote><div><p>and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, that it is licensed under the GPL license. (or if &gt;=, then &gt;=)</p><blockquote><div><p>That's \_it\_.</p></div></blockquote><p>Section 2a. of the GPL2 is 4 lines long. The entire license file is 339 lines long. i.e. that's not just \_it\_ at all.</p><blockquote><div><p>It does not require you to perform any advertising,</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure it does. You must both advertise to the downstream user their rights under the license, and in some circumstances the No Warranty text should be shown. This is Term 1, it's not exactly buried in the text.</p><blockquote><div><p>nor acknowledge where the code came from.</p></div></blockquote><p>The original copyright statements must remain intact. (Term 1.)</p><blockquote><div><p>You want attribution? Use the old BSD license, or the new Apache one, not the GPL.</p></div></blockquote><p>An interesting commentary on the goals of the licenses and motivations of authors can be taken from this.</p><blockquote><div><p>I would say that plugin address spaces aren't kept separate (thus avoiding the issue entirely) is a Firefox \_bug\_ (or perhaps it's designed that way on purpose),</p></div></blockquote><p>maybe that is a Firefox bug.</p><blockquote><div><p>rather than any GPL violation.</p></div></blockquote><p>WTF are you talking about?? Please explain why it can not be both these unrelated things?</p><blockquote><div><p>So far, nothing in the summary (nor any of the articles) points out the GPL violation.</p></div></blockquote><p>Once again, WTF are you talking about?? Except the part in the summary which says they incorporated the code of a GPL project without licensing their plugin as GPL nor letting their users know their rights under that license.</p><p>Technically a customer has to request the code and be denied it, but probably the failure to advertise that the code is available to end users under the terms of the GPL is enough to get them legally in the poop and get slapped with an injunction.</p><blockquote><div><p>Additionally, if you're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed can't coexist with plugins that aren't GPL'ed, that's an interesting statement.</p></div></blockquote><p>Where does this strawman come from? The problem here is not that 2 plugins of differing license sit side by side, it is that GPL code is being mixed with non-GPL code into a non-GPL product and redistributed as non-GPL. The fact that it is a for-profit company doing this doesn't change much beyond kill any innocent-mistake excuses.</p><blockquote><div><p>If that were true, I would hope that the GPL is \_banned\_ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators.</p></div></blockquote><p>All Firefox users are absolutely fine to use a mix of GPL and non GPL plugins at run time. What they can't do is redistribute the things together as a single monolithic program to others without relicensing the entire package as GPL. The GPL has to do with redistribution, not use. (ie the "copy" in "copyright")</p><p>Please <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.txt" title="gnu.org">RTF License</a> [gnu.org]! It's really not that hard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery,No it does n't .
It requires that you ship the offer of code with the binary.Please actually read the thing [ gnu.org ] before making ADAMANT BUT COMPLETELY WRONG CLAIMS IN ALL CAPS.That goes for moderators too , at least those sucked in by posters relying on authoritative sounding claims.and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license.No , that it is licensed under the GPL license .
( or if &gt; = , then &gt; = ) That 's \ _it \ _.Section 2a .
of the GPL2 is 4 lines long .
The entire license file is 339 lines long .
i.e. that 's not just \ _it \ _ at all.It does not require you to perform any advertising,Sure it does .
You must both advertise to the downstream user their rights under the license , and in some circumstances the No Warranty text should be shown .
This is Term 1 , it 's not exactly buried in the text.nor acknowledge where the code came from.The original copyright statements must remain intact .
( Term 1 .
) You want attribution ?
Use the old BSD license , or the new Apache one , not the GPL.An interesting commentary on the goals of the licenses and motivations of authors can be taken from this.I would say that plugin address spaces are n't kept separate ( thus avoiding the issue entirely ) is a Firefox \ _bug \ _ ( or perhaps it 's designed that way on purpose ) ,maybe that is a Firefox bug.rather than any GPL violation.WTF are you talking about ? ?
Please explain why it can not be both these unrelated things ? So far , nothing in the summary ( nor any of the articles ) points out the GPL violation.Once again , WTF are you talking about ? ?
Except the part in the summary which says they incorporated the code of a GPL project without licensing their plugin as GPL nor letting their users know their rights under that license.Technically a customer has to request the code and be denied it , but probably the failure to advertise that the code is available to end users under the terms of the GPL is enough to get them legally in the poop and get slapped with an injunction.Additionally , if you 're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed ca n't coexist with plugins that are n't GPL'ed , that 's an interesting statement.Where does this strawman come from ?
The problem here is not that 2 plugins of differing license sit side by side , it is that GPL code is being mixed with non-GPL code into a non-GPL product and redistributed as non-GPL .
The fact that it is a for-profit company doing this does n't change much beyond kill any innocent-mistake excuses.If that were true , I would hope that the GPL is \ _banned \ _ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators.All Firefox users are absolutely fine to use a mix of GPL and non GPL plugins at run time .
What they ca n't do is redistribute the things together as a single monolithic program to others without relicensing the entire package as GPL .
The GPL has to do with redistribution , not use .
( ie the " copy " in " copyright " ) Please RTF License [ gnu.org ] !
It 's really not that hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GPL requires that you ship code with the delivery,No it doesn't.
It requires that you ship the offer of code with the binary.Please actually read the thing [gnu.org] before making ADAMANT BUT COMPLETELY WRONG CLAIMS IN ALL CAPS.That goes for moderators too, at least those sucked in by posters relying on authoritative sounding claims.and that the package is licensed under a GPL acceptable license.No, that it is licensed under the GPL license.
(or if &gt;=, then &gt;=)That's \_it\_.Section 2a.
of the GPL2 is 4 lines long.
The entire license file is 339 lines long.
i.e. that's not just \_it\_ at all.It does not require you to perform any advertising,Sure it does.
You must both advertise to the downstream user their rights under the license, and in some circumstances the No Warranty text should be shown.
This is Term 1, it's not exactly buried in the text.nor acknowledge where the code came from.The original copyright statements must remain intact.
(Term 1.
)You want attribution?
Use the old BSD license, or the new Apache one, not the GPL.An interesting commentary on the goals of the licenses and motivations of authors can be taken from this.I would say that plugin address spaces aren't kept separate (thus avoiding the issue entirely) is a Firefox \_bug\_ (or perhaps it's designed that way on purpose),maybe that is a Firefox bug.rather than any GPL violation.WTF are you talking about??
Please explain why it can not be both these unrelated things?So far, nothing in the summary (nor any of the articles) points out the GPL violation.Once again, WTF are you talking about??
Except the part in the summary which says they incorporated the code of a GPL project without licensing their plugin as GPL nor letting their users know their rights under that license.Technically a customer has to request the code and be denied it, but probably the failure to advertise that the code is available to end users under the terms of the GPL is enough to get them legally in the poop and get slapped with an injunction.Additionally, if you're saying that plugins that are GPL'ed can't coexist with plugins that aren't GPL'ed, that's an interesting statement.Where does this strawman come from?
The problem here is not that 2 plugins of differing license sit side by side, it is that GPL code is being mixed with non-GPL code into a non-GPL product and redistributed as non-GPL.
The fact that it is a for-profit company doing this doesn't change much beyond kill any innocent-mistake excuses.If that were true, I would hope that the GPL is \_banned\_ as an acceptable plugin license in order to prevent all Firefox users from being copyright violators.All Firefox users are absolutely fine to use a mix of GPL and non GPL plugins at run time.
What they can't do is redistribute the things together as a single monolithic program to others without relicensing the entire package as GPL.
The GPL has to do with redistribution, not use.
(ie the "copy" in "copyright")Please RTF License [gnu.org]!
It's really not that hard.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415539</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412815</id>
	<title>A friendly reminder.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since copyright infringement is not theft, logically it follows that GPL violation is also not theft.  Please, try to be consistent.  Otherwise you look like a bunch of frothing, hypocritical idiots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since copyright infringement is not theft , logically it follows that GPL violation is also not theft .
Please , try to be consistent .
Otherwise you look like a bunch of frothing , hypocritical idiots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since copyright infringement is not theft, logically it follows that GPL violation is also not theft.
Please, try to be consistent.
Otherwise you look like a bunch of frothing, hypocritical idiots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1245616680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.</p></div><p>If copyright were abolished, we would be free to copy and modify software without legal repercussions, so we wouldn't need to rely so much on the GPL. Of course, no modifying could be done unless programmers voluntarily published their source code. But in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason <i>not</i> to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free. It would be advantageous to publish the source code, to ensure quality and make bugs and security holes visible.</p><p>
In short, if copyright were abolished, we would have no use for the GPL.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.If copyright were abolished , we would be free to copy and modify software without legal repercussions , so we would n't need to rely so much on the GPL .
Of course , no modifying could be done unless programmers voluntarily published their source code .
But in a theoretical world without copyright , there would be no reason not to publish your source code - because you would n't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free .
It would be advantageous to publish the source code , to ensure quality and make bugs and security holes visible .
In short , if copyright were abolished , we would have no use for the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what the copyright abolitionist would say when copyright is abolished and the GPL stops to be enforceable... Oh well.If copyright were abolished, we would be free to copy and modify software without legal repercussions, so we wouldn't need to rely so much on the GPL.
Of course, no modifying could be done unless programmers voluntarily published their source code.
But in a theoretical world without copyright, there would be no reason not to publish your source code - because you wouldn't be able to profit off of software sales in a world where anyone could legally copy your program for free.
It would be advantageous to publish the source code, to ensure quality and make bugs and security holes visible.
In short, if copyright were abolished, we would have no use for the GPL.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413187</id>
	<title>Lock and load, lawyers</title>
	<author>Qubit</author>
	<datestamp>1245575880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fifty comments in this thread and no one has mentioned the <a href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/" title="softwarefreedom.org">Software Freedom Law Center</a> [softwarefreedom.org]? Amateurs!</p><p>The lead developer for FlashGot needs to contact the SFLC. Right. Now. The SFLC has lawyers on staff who eat companies like this for breakfast. Or at least, you know, they'll give them a very stern talking-to.</p><p>He shouldn't contact the supposed violators (that could cause legal murkiness), he should not go fishing around for evidence of the violation (again, more lawyerly problems), he should not pass Go, and in no way shape or form should he try to collect $200 from <em>anyone</em>.</p><p>Once he talks to the lawyers then he'll know what steps he should take to document the violation and then to approach the violators. By putting his ducks in a row first and by communicating with a lawyer, he'll have a much easier time approaching the Sothink company and getting the violation resolved.</p><p>Pro tip: The last time I emailed the SFLC it took 13 days for them to respond, so in order to get the ball rolling on resolving this problem I'd suggest picking up the phone and calling them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fifty comments in this thread and no one has mentioned the Software Freedom Law Center [ softwarefreedom.org ] ?
Amateurs ! The lead developer for FlashGot needs to contact the SFLC .
Right. Now .
The SFLC has lawyers on staff who eat companies like this for breakfast .
Or at least , you know , they 'll give them a very stern talking-to.He should n't contact the supposed violators ( that could cause legal murkiness ) , he should not go fishing around for evidence of the violation ( again , more lawyerly problems ) , he should not pass Go , and in no way shape or form should he try to collect $ 200 from anyone.Once he talks to the lawyers then he 'll know what steps he should take to document the violation and then to approach the violators .
By putting his ducks in a row first and by communicating with a lawyer , he 'll have a much easier time approaching the Sothink company and getting the violation resolved.Pro tip : The last time I emailed the SFLC it took 13 days for them to respond , so in order to get the ball rolling on resolving this problem I 'd suggest picking up the phone and calling them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fifty comments in this thread and no one has mentioned the Software Freedom Law Center [softwarefreedom.org]?
Amateurs!The lead developer for FlashGot needs to contact the SFLC.
Right. Now.
The SFLC has lawyers on staff who eat companies like this for breakfast.
Or at least, you know, they'll give them a very stern talking-to.He shouldn't contact the supposed violators (that could cause legal murkiness), he should not go fishing around for evidence of the violation (again, more lawyerly problems), he should not pass Go, and in no way shape or form should he try to collect $200 from anyone.Once he talks to the lawyers then he'll know what steps he should take to document the violation and then to approach the violators.
By putting his ducks in a row first and by communicating with a lawyer, he'll have a much easier time approaching the Sothink company and getting the violation resolved.Pro tip: The last time I emailed the SFLC it took 13 days for them to respond, so in order to get the ball rolling on resolving this problem I'd suggest picking up the phone and calling them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28450127</id>
	<title>It has been licensed now.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245877140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License (GPL) now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License ( GPL ) now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sothink Web Video Downloader for Firefox software is licensed under The GNU General Public License (GPL) now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412873</id>
	<title>Re:Proof of that Statement?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL...</p></div><p>I don't think the SoThink people are interested in being civil as you imply:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone previously mentioned the fact that this add-on sends you to a third party site IN CHINA to download the videos. Well, shortly after installing this add-on I was surfing the net, chose a site and was "hijacked" to an IP in CHINA. Imagine that! Not a good sign if they have included a nice trojan horse for you to have sitting on your computer with this add-on. Be Careful!</p></div><p>- Ref. <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/reviews/display/6541" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/reviews/display/6541</a> [mozilla.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink , I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL...I do n't think the SoThink people are interested in being civil as you imply : Someone previously mentioned the fact that this add-on sends you to a third party site IN CHINA to download the videos .
Well , shortly after installing this add-on I was surfing the net , chose a site and was " hijacked " to an IP in CHINA .
Imagine that !
Not a good sign if they have included a nice trojan horse for you to have sitting on your computer with this add-on .
Be Careful ! - Ref .
https : //addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/reviews/display/6541 [ mozilla.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not defending SoThink in any way and hope that FlashGot takes action but instead of opting to sue SoThink, I hope he first tries to force them to open up their own tool under the GPL...I don't think the SoThink people are interested in being civil as you imply:Someone previously mentioned the fact that this add-on sends you to a third party site IN CHINA to download the videos.
Well, shortly after installing this add-on I was surfing the net, chose a site and was "hijacked" to an IP in CHINA.
Imagine that!
Not a good sign if they have included a nice trojan horse for you to have sitting on your computer with this add-on.
Be Careful!- Ref.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/reviews/display/6541 [mozilla.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245616080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're obviously new here...</p><p>Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc.  However, there's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.</p><p>Yet we live in a society where surveillance is a double-edged sword.  It's more favorable to our freedoms to let someone get away with copying a Miley Cyrus song rather than letting bureaucrats crush us and turn daily life into red-tape + TSA-like conditions.</p><p>Does this shift everything in favor of the little guys?  Sure.  Life isn't fair, but we hope to improve society (even if it's a slow process). Given the proclivity of human nature, it's FAR safer for smaller crimes to go unpunished than grant corporations overwhelming powers and let LARGE crimes go unpunished.  Case in point:  Recent housing &amp; banking economic scandals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're obviously new here...Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc .
However , there 's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.Yet we live in a society where surveillance is a double-edged sword .
It 's more favorable to our freedoms to let someone get away with copying a Miley Cyrus song rather than letting bureaucrats crush us and turn daily life into red-tape + TSA-like conditions.Does this shift everything in favor of the little guys ?
Sure. Life is n't fair , but we hope to improve society ( even if it 's a slow process ) .
Given the proclivity of human nature , it 's FAR safer for smaller crimes to go unpunished than grant corporations overwhelming powers and let LARGE crimes go unpunished .
Case in point : Recent housing &amp; banking economic scandals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're obviously new here...Piracy and GPL violations both hurt workers in the field of computing/entertainment/etc.
However, there's a big difference between a random Joe copying an mp3 and a corporate entity stealing a product and re-marketing it as their own.Yet we live in a society where surveillance is a double-edged sword.
It's more favorable to our freedoms to let someone get away with copying a Miley Cyrus song rather than letting bureaucrats crush us and turn daily life into red-tape + TSA-like conditions.Does this shift everything in favor of the little guys?
Sure.  Life isn't fair, but we hope to improve society (even if it's a slow process).
Given the proclivity of human nature, it's FAR safer for smaller crimes to go unpunished than grant corporations overwhelming powers and let LARGE crimes go unpunished.
Case in point:  Recent housing &amp; banking economic scandals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751</id>
	<title>Sigh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245615660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot</i> </p></div> </blockquote><p>
It's not theft, it's copyright infringement and plagiarism.  It's not theft when the RIAA are the victim, and it's not theft when programmers are the victim.  Two completely different illegal actions.  It's also not a number of other offences - it's not murder, it's not speeding, it's not jaywalking, and it's not theft.  Different names for different offences.  Get it?
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot It 's not theft , it 's copyright infringement and plagiarism .
It 's not theft when the RIAA are the victim , and it 's not theft when programmers are the victim .
Two completely different illegal actions .
It 's also not a number of other offences - it 's not murder , it 's not speeding , it 's not jaywalking , and it 's not theft .
Different names for different offences .
Get it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> People at Sothink decided to violate the GPL by stealing a piece of core code from FlashGot  
It's not theft, it's copyright infringement and plagiarism.
It's not theft when the RIAA are the victim, and it's not theft when programmers are the victim.
Two completely different illegal actions.
It's also not a number of other offences - it's not murder, it's not speeding, it's not jaywalking, and it's not theft.
Different names for different offences.
Get it?

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617</id>
	<title>Firefox extension source?</title>
	<author>phantomcircuit</author>
	<datestamp>1245614460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not like firefox extensions are compiled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not like firefox extensions are compiled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not like firefox extensions are compiled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413541</id>
	<title>Does it matter?</title>
	<author>speedtux</author>
	<datestamp>1245578460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there is no native code in Sothink, then it's effectively source-available.  So, the only question is one of license.  But if it incorporates GPL code, it automatically falls under the GPL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is no native code in Sothink , then it 's effectively source-available .
So , the only question is one of license .
But if it incorporates GPL code , it automatically falls under the GPL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is no native code in Sothink, then it's effectively source-available.
So, the only question is one of license.
But if it incorporates GPL code, it automatically falls under the GPL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413771</id>
	<title>Re:Oh Slashdot...</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1245580380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That would be a good reason to publish only binaries and fill them up with all sorts of hard-to-defeat DRM-like piracy countermeasures and arcane tactics like remote identifying and banning computers from running the SW.
</p><p>
Someone might manage to defeat them at some point, but if they didn't buy the software legitimately, they don't get bugfixes, upgrades,  or addon packages.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be a good reason to publish only binaries and fill them up with all sorts of hard-to-defeat DRM-like piracy countermeasures and arcane tactics like remote identifying and banning computers from running the SW . Someone might manage to defeat them at some point , but if they did n't buy the software legitimately , they do n't get bugfixes , upgrades , or addon packages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That would be a good reason to publish only binaries and fill them up with all sorts of hard-to-defeat DRM-like piracy countermeasures and arcane tactics like remote identifying and banning computers from running the SW.

Someone might manage to defeat them at some point, but if they didn't buy the software legitimately, they don't get bugfixes, upgrades,  or addon packages.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413919
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413675
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412929
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414341
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413645
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422209
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426401
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28441785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28449925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412663
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28418935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414045
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28419601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421275
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413423
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412657
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28450541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414419
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417537
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426437
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28435719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416741
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415351
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416445
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_21_1839203_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413771
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413151
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413837
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413765
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413159
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414003
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415351
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412617
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28450541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28449925
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28418935
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421571
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413013
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412873
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413777
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413707
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28435719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417079
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414419
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417537
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413119
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412897
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413559
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28417285
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414341
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414667
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413645
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414405
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413771
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426437
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28422209
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412805
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28419601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414045
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412877
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28426401
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28441785
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412741
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416911
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415391
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28421275
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28416607
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413183
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28415771
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412929
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28412867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28414547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413675
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_21_1839203.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_21_1839203.28413541
</commentlist>
</conversation>
