<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_21_2319200</id>
	<title>Singer In Grocery Store Ordered To Pay Royalties</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1256147580000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>yog writes <i>"An assistant at a grocery store in Clackmannanshire, Scotland, was ordered by the Performing Right Society (PRS) to obtain a performer's license and to <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk\_news/scotland/tayside\_and\_central/8317952.stm">pay royalties because she was informally singing popular songs while stocking groceries</a>.  The PRS later backed down and apologized. This after the same store had turned off the radio after a warning from the PRS.  We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy, but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol. 'Music to the ears' has become 'dollars in the bank'."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>yog writes " An assistant at a grocery store in Clackmannanshire , Scotland , was ordered by the Performing Right Society ( PRS ) to obtain a performer 's license and to pay royalties because she was informally singing popular songs while stocking groceries .
The PRS later backed down and apologized .
This after the same store had turned off the radio after a warning from the PRS .
We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy , but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol .
'Music to the ears ' has become 'dollars in the bank' .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yog writes "An assistant at a grocery store in Clackmannanshire, Scotland, was ordered by the Performing Right Society (PRS) to obtain a performer's license and to pay royalties because she was informally singing popular songs while stocking groceries.
The PRS later backed down and apologized.
This after the same store had turned off the radio after a warning from the PRS.
We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy, but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol.
'Music to the ears' has become 'dollars in the bank'.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832553</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>the\_womble</author>
	<datestamp>1256243400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why should we have special laws just so you make that money?</p><p>We had songs (and good ones) before copyright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should we have special laws just so you make that money ? We had songs ( and good ones ) before copyright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should we have special laws just so you make that money?We had songs (and good ones) before copyright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835647</id>
	<title>Music majors are thiefs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256228460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not put the music companies out of business for stealing from artists and consumers ?<br>I think theft is much worse than singing out of key.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not put the music companies out of business for stealing from artists and consumers ? I think theft is much worse than singing out of key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not put the music companies out of business for stealing from artists and consumers ?I think theft is much worse than singing out of key.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834403</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the airplane were invented today it would fail to generate an "airline industry" because of all the royalties airlines would have to pay to land owners for flying over their lands, apartments, and so on.</p><p>Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed. When did common sense become legally obsolete?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the airplane were invented today it would fail to generate an " airline industry " because of all the royalties airlines would have to pay to land owners for flying over their lands , apartments , and so on.Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed .
When did common sense become legally obsolete ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the airplane were invented today it would fail to generate an "airline industry" because of all the royalties airlines would have to pay to land owners for flying over their lands, apartments, and so on.Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed.
When did common sense become legally obsolete?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834087</id>
	<title>Oh the irony...</title>
	<author>M-RES</author>
	<datestamp>1256219400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone else think it's ironic that the PRS (Performing Rights Society) whose job it is to collect royalties on behalf of artists is trying to charge a performing artist money?</p><p>So just imagine if she had been singing her own material and paid the PRS the required fee - just how much would she see of that money from the PRS when they came to pay out her due royalty earnings? It'd be interesting to know how big a cut they take!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-o </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else think it 's ironic that the PRS ( Performing Rights Society ) whose job it is to collect royalties on behalf of artists is trying to charge a performing artist money ? So just imagine if she had been singing her own material and paid the PRS the required fee - just how much would she see of that money from the PRS when they came to pay out her due royalty earnings ?
It 'd be interesting to know how big a cut they take !
: -o</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else think it's ironic that the PRS (Performing Rights Society) whose job it is to collect royalties on behalf of artists is trying to charge a performing artist money?So just imagine if she had been singing her own material and paid the PRS the required fee - just how much would she see of that money from the PRS when they came to pay out her due royalty earnings?
It'd be interesting to know how big a cut they take!
:-o </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833145</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>totally bogus dude</author>
	<datestamp>1256208300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ABC's <em>Hungry Beast</em> put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for, although I did read a comment someone made on their site (<a href="http://hungrybeast.abc.net.au/stories/testing-testers" title="abc.net.au">link</a> [abc.net.au]) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces don't receive thorough investigation, and don't merit it.</p><p> <em>Media Watch</em> also covered <em>Hungry Beast's</em> fictional <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2698835.htm" title="abc.net.au">Levitt Institute</a> [abc.net.au]. The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ("These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes.").</p><p>A more recent episode of <em>Media Watch</em> talked about a fake art piece called <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2711828.htm" title="abc.net.au">The Rape Tunnel</a> [abc.net.au]. This was run by Gawker, and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax, and the original creator of the hoax (Artlurker) also admitted it. Five days later, News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.</p><p>In both cases, they're not all that interesting pieces and arguably don't deserve much scrutiny - they're basically just fluff pieces. But on the other hand, neither of these was particularly well-disguised. The fake Levitt Institute report could've been outed simply by reading the entire report. If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would've seen the article was a fake, seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.</p><p>It seems for these kind of thing, the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it's real, or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it. I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker, they wouldn't do any kind of verification whatsoever.</p><p>In a way I don't really care; at the same time, I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and can't be trusted, so it does irk me a bit to see that even "real" news agencies don't do basic fact-checking before publishing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ABC 's Hungry Beast put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for , although I did read a comment someone made on their site ( link [ abc.net.au ] ) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces do n't receive thorough investigation , and do n't merit it .
Media Watch also covered Hungry Beast 's fictional Levitt Institute [ abc.net.au ] .
The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ( " These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes .
" ) .A more recent episode of Media Watch talked about a fake art piece called The Rape Tunnel [ abc.net.au ] .
This was run by Gawker , and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax , and the original creator of the hoax ( Artlurker ) also admitted it .
Five days later , News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.In both cases , they 're not all that interesting pieces and arguably do n't deserve much scrutiny - they 're basically just fluff pieces .
But on the other hand , neither of these was particularly well-disguised .
The fake Levitt Institute report could 've been outed simply by reading the entire report .
If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would 've seen the article was a fake , seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.It seems for these kind of thing , the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it 's real , or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it .
I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker , they would n't do any kind of verification whatsoever.In a way I do n't really care ; at the same time , I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and ca n't be trusted , so it does irk me a bit to see that even " real " news agencies do n't do basic fact-checking before publishing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ABC's Hungry Beast put out a fake press release for their first episode which a lot of news outlets fell for, although I did read a comment someone made on their site (link [abc.net.au]) about the realities of the newsroom and how fluff pieces don't receive thorough investigation, and don't merit it.
Media Watch also covered Hungry Beast's fictional Levitt Institute [abc.net.au].
The funniest part was that their press released actually included a paragraph stating that the results of the survey were made up ("These results were completely made up to be fictitious material through a process of modified truth and credibility nodes.
").A more recent episode of Media Watch talked about a fake art piece called The Rape Tunnel [abc.net.au].
This was run by Gawker, and then the next day they published an admission that it was a hoax, and the original creator of the hoax (Artlurker) also admitted it.
Five days later, News Limited picked it up and run the story as if it was factual.In both cases, they're not all that interesting pieces and arguably don't deserve much scrutiny - they're basically just fluff pieces.
But on the other hand, neither of these was particularly well-disguised.
The fake Levitt Institute report could've been outed simply by reading the entire report.
If someone at News Ltd had done even the simplest of searches or checked the originating websites they would've seen the article was a fake, seeing how it had been announced as such nearly a week prior.It seems for these kind of thing, the news outlets are no better than that acquaintance with your email address that forwards you everything they receive in the email without checking if it's real, or even applying some basic common sense before forwarding it.
I bet that if they receive something from someone they believe to be a government worker, they wouldn't do any kind of verification whatsoever.In a way I don't really care; at the same time, I often see Big Media execs mouthing off about how bloggers are useless and publish unverified stories and can't be trusted, so it does irk me a bit to see that even "real" news agencies don't do basic fact-checking before publishing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833213</id>
	<title>The geek with long-term memory loss</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1256209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Retailers and restaurants in the states have been living with performance rights issues since the nickelodeon days.</p><p> ASCAP was founded in 1914:</p><p><i>Early on, founding member Victor Herbert brought a lawsuit against Shanley's Restaurant for refusing to pay royalties. The fight took two years and went to the Supreme Court. ASCAP prevailed. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the decision of the Court: "</i> <a href="http://www.ascap.com/about/history/1900s.html" title="ascap.com">The Era of the Player Piano (The Early 1900s)</a> [ascap.com] </p><p><i>"If the rights under the copyright are infringed only by a performance where money is taken at the door, they are very imperfectly protected. Performances not different in kind from those of the defendants could be given that might compete with and even destroy the success of the monopoly that the law intends the plaintiffs to have. It is enough to say that there is no need to construe the statute so narrowly. The defendants' performances are not eleemosynary. They are part of a total for which the public pays, and the fact that the price of the whole is attributed to a particular item which those present are expected to order is not important.</i></p><p><i><br>It is true that the music is not the sole object, but neither is the food, which probably could be got cheaper elsewhere. The object is a repast in surroundings that to people having limited powers of conversation, or disliking the rival noise, give a luxurious pleasure not to be had from eating a silent meal. If music did not pay, it would be given up. If it pays, it pays out of the public's pocket. Whether it pays or not, the purpose of employing it is profit, and that is enough."</i> <a href="http://supreme.justia.com/us/242/591/case.html" title="justia.com">Herbert v. Shanley Co., 242 U.S. 591 (1917)</a> [justia.com] </p><p>Holmes was not one to waste words, summing up the circuit court's decision and reversing it in three short, plain-spoken, paragraphs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Retailers and restaurants in the states have been living with performance rights issues since the nickelodeon days .
ASCAP was founded in 1914 : Early on , founding member Victor Herbert brought a lawsuit against Shanley 's Restaurant for refusing to pay royalties .
The fight took two years and went to the Supreme Court .
ASCAP prevailed .
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the decision of the Court : " The Era of the Player Piano ( The Early 1900s ) [ ascap.com ] " If the rights under the copyright are infringed only by a performance where money is taken at the door , they are very imperfectly protected .
Performances not different in kind from those of the defendants could be given that might compete with and even destroy the success of the monopoly that the law intends the plaintiffs to have .
It is enough to say that there is no need to construe the statute so narrowly .
The defendants ' performances are not eleemosynary .
They are part of a total for which the public pays , and the fact that the price of the whole is attributed to a particular item which those present are expected to order is not important.It is true that the music is not the sole object , but neither is the food , which probably could be got cheaper elsewhere .
The object is a repast in surroundings that to people having limited powers of conversation , or disliking the rival noise , give a luxurious pleasure not to be had from eating a silent meal .
If music did not pay , it would be given up .
If it pays , it pays out of the public 's pocket .
Whether it pays or not , the purpose of employing it is profit , and that is enough .
" Herbert v. Shanley Co. , 242 U.S. 591 ( 1917 ) [ justia.com ] Holmes was not one to waste words , summing up the circuit court 's decision and reversing it in three short , plain-spoken , paragraphs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Retailers and restaurants in the states have been living with performance rights issues since the nickelodeon days.
ASCAP was founded in 1914:Early on, founding member Victor Herbert brought a lawsuit against Shanley's Restaurant for refusing to pay royalties.
The fight took two years and went to the Supreme Court.
ASCAP prevailed.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the decision of the Court: " The Era of the Player Piano (The Early 1900s) [ascap.com] "If the rights under the copyright are infringed only by a performance where money is taken at the door, they are very imperfectly protected.
Performances not different in kind from those of the defendants could be given that might compete with and even destroy the success of the monopoly that the law intends the plaintiffs to have.
It is enough to say that there is no need to construe the statute so narrowly.
The defendants' performances are not eleemosynary.
They are part of a total for which the public pays, and the fact that the price of the whole is attributed to a particular item which those present are expected to order is not important.It is true that the music is not the sole object, but neither is the food, which probably could be got cheaper elsewhere.
The object is a repast in surroundings that to people having limited powers of conversation, or disliking the rival noise, give a luxurious pleasure not to be had from eating a silent meal.
If music did not pay, it would be given up.
If it pays, it pays out of the public's pocket.
Whether it pays or not, the purpose of employing it is profit, and that is enough.
" Herbert v. Shanley Co., 242 U.S. 591 (1917) [justia.com] Holmes was not one to waste words, summing up the circuit court's decision and reversing it in three short, plain-spoken, paragraphs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833805</id>
	<title>Re:America! (in a palin voice)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously, you have been drinking too much.  America has even more litigation problems.</p><p>Go try to invent something in the tech sector.  If you're moderately successful, patent trolls will come out of the woodwork and sue you for everything you ever made.  And they'll do it in a court in east Texas, where they have no chance of losing.  And they'll do it 10 years after your product is everywhere and you have no chance of negotiating a reasonable settlement.</p><p>And yes, I'm American.  And yes, I live in east Texas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously , you have been drinking too much .
America has even more litigation problems.Go try to invent something in the tech sector .
If you 're moderately successful , patent trolls will come out of the woodwork and sue you for everything you ever made .
And they 'll do it in a court in east Texas , where they have no chance of losing .
And they 'll do it 10 years after your product is everywhere and you have no chance of negotiating a reasonable settlement.And yes , I 'm American .
And yes , I live in east Texas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously, you have been drinking too much.
America has even more litigation problems.Go try to invent something in the tech sector.
If you're moderately successful, patent trolls will come out of the woodwork and sue you for everything you ever made.
And they'll do it in a court in east Texas, where they have no chance of losing.
And they'll do it 10 years after your product is everywhere and you have no chance of negotiating a reasonable settlement.And yes, I'm American.
And yes, I live in east Texas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832299</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833771</id>
	<title>ASCAP and the PRS do good work</title>
	<author>TheReal\_sabret00the</author>
	<datestamp>1256216940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems as though there's a case here of someone being a little overzealous in the offices that deal with the above area, but these are the companies that most often guarantee that artists [that are smart enough to retain their own publishing] get paid. It's these companies that are in charge of royalty payments so that means songs played on radio, samples used in other songs and music for adverts. Old people living off the dividends of a once flourishing career are grateful for the cheques that these companies send on a regular basis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems as though there 's a case here of someone being a little overzealous in the offices that deal with the above area , but these are the companies that most often guarantee that artists [ that are smart enough to retain their own publishing ] get paid .
It 's these companies that are in charge of royalty payments so that means songs played on radio , samples used in other songs and music for adverts .
Old people living off the dividends of a once flourishing career are grateful for the cheques that these companies send on a regular basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems as though there's a case here of someone being a little overzealous in the offices that deal with the above area, but these are the companies that most often guarantee that artists [that are smart enough to retain their own publishing] get paid.
It's these companies that are in charge of royalty payments so that means songs played on radio, samples used in other songs and music for adverts.
Old people living off the dividends of a once flourishing career are grateful for the cheques that these companies send on a regular basis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838127</id>
	<title>Re:Making political hay</title>
	<author>tkrotchko</author>
	<datestamp>1256238780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was no resolution.  This is simply a case where PRS decided that this was not worth the PR hassle at this time.</p><p>Is is a problem with copyright if the law would supporting over-reaching copyright claims.  That is, if you are certain that if this went to trial the singing stocker would prevail, then great.  If you're not sure, then copyright is the problem.</p><p>The fact that they emboldened enough to make the claim shows me a problem exists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was no resolution .
This is simply a case where PRS decided that this was not worth the PR hassle at this time.Is is a problem with copyright if the law would supporting over-reaching copyright claims .
That is , if you are certain that if this went to trial the singing stocker would prevail , then great .
If you 're not sure , then copyright is the problem.The fact that they emboldened enough to make the claim shows me a problem exists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was no resolution.
This is simply a case where PRS decided that this was not worth the PR hassle at this time.Is is a problem with copyright if the law would supporting over-reaching copyright claims.
That is, if you are certain that if this went to trial the singing stocker would prevail, then great.
If you're not sure, then copyright is the problem.The fact that they emboldened enough to make the claim shows me a problem exists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841725</id>
	<title>One thing I have to say... GOOOD!</title>
	<author>BLKMGK</author>
	<datestamp>1256216460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good that they're doing this, do it again and again! Keep doing it until people begin to see just how greedy, sleazy, and utterly ridiculous these people are! Let them keep putting the screws to the public until finally they wake up and see these crooks for what they are. Finally one day people will get a clue - it needs to happen. Sooner rather than later would make me happy...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good that they 're doing this , do it again and again !
Keep doing it until people begin to see just how greedy , sleazy , and utterly ridiculous these people are !
Let them keep putting the screws to the public until finally they wake up and see these crooks for what they are .
Finally one day people will get a clue - it needs to happen .
Sooner rather than later would make me happy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good that they're doing this, do it again and again!
Keep doing it until people begin to see just how greedy, sleazy, and utterly ridiculous these people are!
Let them keep putting the screws to the public until finally they wake up and see these crooks for what they are.
Finally one day people will get a clue - it needs to happen.
Sooner rather than later would make me happy...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256241600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket<br>&gt; to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they<br>&gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which<br>&gt; makes it a tool of commerce.</p><p>Yes, and so is the building itself, the paint to make the walls look nice, and much more.</p><p>Should the builders, paint manufacturers, etc. get 'royalties' because you use their products commercially?</p><p>I don't think so. So "used as a tool of commerce" is just not a valid argument.</p><p>Just as with the building/paint/what's in the building, the radio has already been paid for. Via tax (as in NL) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit. Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately, so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket &gt; to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they &gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which &gt; makes it a tool of commerce.Yes , and so is the building itself , the paint to make the walls look nice , and much more.Should the builders , paint manufacturers , etc .
get 'royalties ' because you use their products commercially ? I do n't think so .
So " used as a tool of commerce " is just not a valid argument.Just as with the building/paint/what 's in the building , the radio has already been paid for .
Via tax ( as in NL ) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit .
Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately , so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket&gt; to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they&gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which&gt; makes it a tool of commerce.Yes, and so is the building itself, the paint to make the walls look nice, and much more.Should the builders, paint manufacturers, etc.
get 'royalties' because you use their products commercially?I don't think so.
So "used as a tool of commerce" is just not a valid argument.Just as with the building/paint/what's in the building, the radio has already been paid for.
Via tax (as in NL) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit.
Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately, so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832597</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Guignol</author>
	<datestamp>1256244060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well I certainly hope there wasn't alot of them, that would be alittle troubling</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I certainly hope there was n't alot of them , that would be alittle troubling</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I certainly hope there wasn't alot of them, that would be alittle troubling</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837571</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>kthejoker</author>
	<datestamp>1256236680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's called the <a href="http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-whyspeculate.html" title="crichton-official.com">Gell-Mann Amnesia effect</a> [crichton-official.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect [ crichton-official.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect [crichton-official.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833393</id>
	<title>Re:New alternative to censorship</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1256212080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we're going to do that, I propose a heavy tax on use of the word "awesome".</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we 're going to do that , I propose a heavy tax on use of the word " awesome " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we're going to do that, I propose a heavy tax on use of the word "awesome".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832497</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>BakaHoushi</author>
	<datestamp>1256242260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a question: If I'm listening to a song stuck in my head, do they still want me to pay them for it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a question : If I 'm listening to a song stuck in my head , do they still want me to pay them for it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a question: If I'm listening to a song stuck in my head, do they still want me to pay them for it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846925</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>steveo777</author>
	<datestamp>1256317380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean that any time someone says "Mother Fucker" they have to pay royalties to every rapper ever?  That's going to be a pain in the ass!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean that any time someone says " Mother Fucker " they have to pay royalties to every rapper ever ?
That 's going to be a pain in the ass !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean that any time someone says "Mother Fucker" they have to pay royalties to every rapper ever?
That's going to be a pain in the ass!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843085</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>metaforest</author>
	<datestamp>1256237100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the Sex Pistols said, **Content Removed Due To Copyright Assertion**  !!@!^&amp;\%^&amp; NO CARRIER</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the Sex Pistols said , * * Content Removed Due To Copyright Assertion * * ! !
@ ! ^ &amp; \ % ^ &amp; NO CARRIER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the Sex Pistols said, **Content Removed Due To Copyright Assertion**  !!
@!^&amp;\%^&amp; NO CARRIER</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833221</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256209320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed... fuck this world we live in!</p><p>*Down the road, not across the street*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed... fuck this world we live in !
* Down the road , not across the street *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed... fuck this world we live in!
*Down the road, not across the street*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842183</id>
	<title>Just try to make me pay</title>
	<author>Pete Venkman</author>
	<datestamp>1256223540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If someone tried this shit on me, I would have no choice but to write my own song, "Go Fuck Yourself".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...of course, it would be licensed under creative commons.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If someone tried this shit on me , I would have no choice but to write my own song , " Go Fuck Yourself " .
...of course , it would be licensed under creative commons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If someone tried this shit on me, I would have no choice but to write my own song, "Go Fuck Yourself".
...of course, it would be licensed under creative commons.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834723</id>
	<title>Insane</title>
	<author>Pec</author>
	<datestamp>1256223900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frankly, this is insane, the World has gone crazy. In the future we will have to carry around a wallet full of bills of our purchases in whatever we have and actions we do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , this is insane , the World has gone crazy .
In the future we will have to carry around a wallet full of bills of our purchases in whatever we have and actions we do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly, this is insane, the World has gone crazy.
In the future we will have to carry around a wallet full of bills of our purchases in whatever we have and actions we do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833655</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1256215740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket
&gt; to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they
&gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which
&gt; makes it a tool of commerce.</p><p>Yes, and so is the building itself, the paint to make the walls look nice, and much more.</p><p>Should the builders, paint manufacturers, etc. get 'royalties' because you use their products commercially?</p><p>I don't think so. </p></div><p>Some do, it's called rent.  The choice is to either buy everything outright, or pay a fee for it's use on an ongoing basis.  You could buy the right sto a song; just as you can a building; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it's use (and the stuff inside) without every owning anything.
</p><p><div class="quote"><p>So "used as a tool of commerce" is just not a valid argument.</p><p>Just as with the building/paint/what's in the building, the radio has already been paid for. Via tax (as in NL) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit. Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately, so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store?</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>While I agree it should only be paid for once - whether it's via a tax (although I find the notion I should pay a tax / TV just to own one absurd) or the stations paying for performance rights; that unfortunately isn't the case.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket &gt; to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they &gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which &gt; makes it a tool of commerce.Yes , and so is the building itself , the paint to make the walls look nice , and much more.Should the builders , paint manufacturers , etc .
get 'royalties ' because you use their products commercially ? I do n't think so .
Some do , it 's called rent .
The choice is to either buy everything outright , or pay a fee for it 's use on an ongoing basis .
You could buy the right sto a song ; just as you can a building ; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it 's use ( and the stuff inside ) without every owning anything .
So " used as a tool of commerce " is just not a valid argument.Just as with the building/paint/what 's in the building , the radio has already been paid for .
Via tax ( as in NL ) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit .
Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately , so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store ? While I agree it should only be paid for once - whether it 's via a tax ( although I find the notion I should pay a tax / TV just to own one absurd ) or the stations paying for performance rights ; that unfortunately is n't the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket
&gt; to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they
&gt; use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which
&gt; makes it a tool of commerce.Yes, and so is the building itself, the paint to make the walls look nice, and much more.Should the builders, paint manufacturers, etc.
get 'royalties' because you use their products commercially?I don't think so.
Some do, it's called rent.
The choice is to either buy everything outright, or pay a fee for it's use on an ongoing basis.
You could buy the right sto a song; just as you can a building; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it's use (and the stuff inside) without every owning anything.
So "used as a tool of commerce" is just not a valid argument.Just as with the building/paint/what's in the building, the radio has already been paid for.
Via tax (as in NL) and/or the radio stations which pay to transmit.
Everyone can freely listen to the radio privately, so why should anyone have to pay to use it in a store?While I agree it should only be paid for once - whether it's via a tax (although I find the notion I should pay a tax / TV just to own one absurd) or the stations paying for performance rights; that unfortunately isn't the case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833481</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>ctrl-alt-canc</author>
	<datestamp>1256213040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since you are a professional writer, you are entitled to get money from every slashdot user who reads your post. </p><p>Disclaimer: I replied to your post without reading it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you are a professional writer , you are entitled to get money from every slashdot user who reads your post .
Disclaimer : I replied to your post without reading it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you are a professional writer, you are entitled to get money from every slashdot user who reads your post.
Disclaimer: I replied to your post without reading it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832773</id>
	<title>Apparently Orwell got it wrong...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256203560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It won't be the Party that's monitoring us, it'll be the International Media Police. Forget "thought-crime"... New term, TuneCrime: those who show "dis-royalty" by not subscribing to Sony-Music-Groupthink. Emmanuel Goldstein is The Pirate Bay, and Winston? It wasn't the diary or Julia that did him in...it was humming. Technically, still a performance with the telescreen monitor as the audience.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It wo n't be the Party that 's monitoring us , it 'll be the International Media Police .
Forget " thought-crime " ... New term , TuneCrime : those who show " dis-royalty " by not subscribing to Sony-Music-Groupthink .
Emmanuel Goldstein is The Pirate Bay , and Winston ?
It was n't the diary or Julia that did him in...it was humming .
Technically , still a performance with the telescreen monitor as the audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It won't be the Party that's monitoring us, it'll be the International Media Police.
Forget "thought-crime"... New term, TuneCrime: those who show "dis-royalty" by not subscribing to Sony-Music-Groupthink.
Emmanuel Goldstein is The Pirate Bay, and Winston?
It wasn't the diary or Julia that did him in...it was humming.
Technically, still a performance with the telescreen monitor as the audience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832877</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>cbope</author>
	<datestamp>1256204820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More than likely they apologized only because this started to generate negative news. Why didn't they realize they were "going too far" earlier? Like, oh I don't know... before they sent her a demand for money? The should have realized long before this became news that they had no right to demand payment.</p><p>This is extortionist behavior on the part of the PRS (and other similar groups). Strike hard and first seems to be the guiding rule in these types of cases, without even considering the facts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More than likely they apologized only because this started to generate negative news .
Why did n't they realize they were " going too far " earlier ?
Like , oh I do n't know... before they sent her a demand for money ?
The should have realized long before this became news that they had no right to demand payment.This is extortionist behavior on the part of the PRS ( and other similar groups ) .
Strike hard and first seems to be the guiding rule in these types of cases , without even considering the facts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More than likely they apologized only because this started to generate negative news.
Why didn't they realize they were "going too far" earlier?
Like, oh I don't know... before they sent her a demand for money?
The should have realized long before this became news that they had no right to demand payment.This is extortionist behavior on the part of the PRS (and other similar groups).
Strike hard and first seems to be the guiding rule in these types of cases, without even considering the facts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955</id>
	<title>the solution</title>
	<author>muckracer</author>
	<datestamp>1256206200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The solution to this entire issue is to download, download and download some more. Bittorrent-style, of course. Do not pay a single cent into this system anymore. And then, when your favorite band comes to town go see and support them and buy their bloody T-Shirt. Make your money go where your ears are and cut out the middlemen!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The solution to this entire issue is to download , download and download some more .
Bittorrent-style , of course .
Do not pay a single cent into this system anymore .
And then , when your favorite band comes to town go see and support them and buy their bloody T-Shirt .
Make your money go where your ears are and cut out the middlemen !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The solution to this entire issue is to download, download and download some more.
Bittorrent-style, of course.
Do not pay a single cent into this system anymore.
And then, when your favorite band comes to town go see and support them and buy their bloody T-Shirt.
Make your money go where your ears are and cut out the middlemen!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834759</id>
	<title>stop listening or buying music</title>
	<author>p51d007</author>
	<datestamp>1256224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the entire world stopped listening to music, and or buying it, it would take about 10 minutes for the radio stations, recording labels
RIAA etc to come crying back to us to buy/listen to music.
The RIAA et al, are nothing but blood suckers, trying to hold onto an outdated business model.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the entire world stopped listening to music , and or buying it , it would take about 10 minutes for the radio stations , recording labels RIAA etc to come crying back to us to buy/listen to music .
The RIAA et al , are nothing but blood suckers , trying to hold onto an outdated business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the entire world stopped listening to music, and or buying it, it would take about 10 minutes for the radio stations, recording labels
RIAA etc to come crying back to us to buy/listen to music.
The RIAA et al, are nothing but blood suckers, trying to hold onto an outdated business model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833847</id>
	<title>Utter cods!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds more like someone has it in for the store, so they find any old stupid way to frame the staff, so the manager has to shut down. Anyone checked who filed the claims and what rival shop they work at?!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds more like someone has it in for the store , so they find any old stupid way to frame the staff , so the manager has to shut down .
Anyone checked who filed the claims and what rival shop they work at ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds more like someone has it in for the store, so they find any old stupid way to frame the staff, so the manager has to shut down.
Anyone checked who filed the claims and what rival shop they work at?!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833265</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>richard.cs</author>
	<datestamp>1256210220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce. Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this, and rightfully so: people are using the fruits of their labor (music) to help sell merchandise.</p></div><p>I would agree maybe if they were playing prerecorded music like CDs but stop and think for a minute about the radio. The station already broadcasts the music and pays the fees, and if instead of playing the radio in your shop you gave every employee/customer a portable radio they could listen to with headphones that would be entirely legal. It is absurd that there's a difference between that and just playing it for everyone to hear (unless of course the true purpose of the law is to support the manufacturers of portable radios).</p><p>As a bonus if we didn't have this stupid rule call centres could just play a national radio station while they put you on hold rather than driving you insane with utterly crap annoying &ldquo;music&rdquo;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which makes it a tool of commerce .
Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this , and rightfully so : people are using the fruits of their labor ( music ) to help sell merchandise.I would agree maybe if they were playing prerecorded music like CDs but stop and think for a minute about the radio .
The station already broadcasts the music and pays the fees , and if instead of playing the radio in your shop you gave every employee/customer a portable radio they could listen to with headphones that would be entirely legal .
It is absurd that there 's a difference between that and just playing it for everyone to hear ( unless of course the true purpose of the law is to support the manufacturers of portable radios ) .As a bonus if we did n't have this stupid rule call centres could just play a national radio station while they put you on hold rather than driving you insane with utterly crap annoying    music   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.
Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this, and rightfully so: people are using the fruits of their labor (music) to help sell merchandise.I would agree maybe if they were playing prerecorded music like CDs but stop and think for a minute about the radio.
The station already broadcasts the music and pays the fees, and if instead of playing the radio in your shop you gave every employee/customer a portable radio they could listen to with headphones that would be entirely legal.
It is absurd that there's a difference between that and just playing it for everyone to hear (unless of course the true purpose of the law is to support the manufacturers of portable radios).As a bonus if we didn't have this stupid rule call centres could just play a national radio station while they put you on hold rather than driving you insane with utterly crap annoying “music”
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832979</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1256206500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Indeed. Anyone else reminded of the Prole woman that Winston Smith watches singing out the window in 1984?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
Anyone else reminded of the Prole woman that Winston Smith watches singing out the window in 1984 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
Anyone else reminded of the Prole woman that Winston Smith watches singing out the window in 1984?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833173</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anci3nt of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1256208660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>We're very sorry we made a big mistake.   We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck.</p></div><p>
Which is lawyer-speak for "Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure, and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court."</p></div><p>...or just much bigger pockets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're very sorry we made a big mistake .
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck .
Which is lawyer-speak for " Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure , and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court .
" ...or just much bigger pockets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're very sorry we made a big mistake.
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck.
Which is lawyer-speak for "Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure, and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court.
"...or just much bigger pockets.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832503</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833105</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>blahplusplus</author>
	<datestamp>1256207940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"That's what this is."</p><p>This is a natural outcome of applying the concept of private property to information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" That 's what this is .
" This is a natural outcome of applying the concept of private property to information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"That's what this is.
"This is a natural outcome of applying the concept of private property to information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1256202480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going to say "bollocks to that", but I'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to say " bollocks to that " , but I 'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to say "bollocks to that", but I'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834031</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1256219040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not a hoax, it really happened. However this is old news, the PRS has already apologized for the demands and promised not to try to collect on the royalties.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a hoax , it really happened .
However this is old news , the PRS has already apologized for the demands and promised not to try to collect on the royalties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a hoax, it really happened.
However this is old news, the PRS has already apologized for the demands and promised not to try to collect on the royalties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833911</id>
	<title>Re:I personally welcome the silence!</title>
	<author>DigitalSorceress</author>
	<datestamp>1256218020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, you'll have to pay for that too... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4\%E2\%80\%B233\%E2\%80\%B3" title="wikipedia.org">John Cage owns the rights</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Enjoy the silence</p><p>DOH! That's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjoy\_the\_Silence" title="wikipedia.org">Depeche Mode's</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , you 'll have to pay for that too... John Cage owns the rights [ wikipedia.org ] Enjoy the silenceDOH !
That 's Depeche Mode 's [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, you'll have to pay for that too... John Cage owns the rights [wikipedia.org]Enjoy the silenceDOH!
That's Depeche Mode's [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833857</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in the UK and run a small business with a radio in the warehouse for the 4-5 bodies there. We were recently contacted by the PRS and threatened with legal action unless we pay them a a &pound;550 licence fee. We refused. Based on my experience dealing with these assholes I do not find this story unbelievable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in the UK and run a small business with a radio in the warehouse for the 4-5 bodies there .
We were recently contacted by the PRS and threatened with legal action unless we pay them a a   550 licence fee .
We refused .
Based on my experience dealing with these assholes I do not find this story unbelievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in the UK and run a small business with a radio in the warehouse for the 4-5 bodies there.
We were recently contacted by the PRS and threatened with legal action unless we pay them a a £550 licence fee.
We refused.
Based on my experience dealing with these assholes I do not find this story unbelievable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834443</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256221800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the most inanely stupid comment that I have ever read on this website. "the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check" - well, why don't you do it? Just because you do some work doesn't mean that you have to get paid once, like a freelancer, and that is it. The whole point of intellectual property is that you *own* your work. If write a book and make copies to give to someone else, I should be paid for every copy - not just for the hours (at a fixed rate) I put in to write it in the first place. If people don't make money for creative pursuits, then no one will be creative. Whoops... there goes your culture!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the most inanely stupid comment that I have ever read on this website .
" the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check " - well , why do n't you do it ?
Just because you do some work does n't mean that you have to get paid once , like a freelancer , and that is it .
The whole point of intellectual property is that you * own * your work .
If write a book and make copies to give to someone else , I should be paid for every copy - not just for the hours ( at a fixed rate ) I put in to write it in the first place .
If people do n't make money for creative pursuits , then no one will be creative .
Whoops... there goes your culture !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the most inanely stupid comment that I have ever read on this website.
"the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check" - well, why don't you do it?
Just because you do some work doesn't mean that you have to get paid once, like a freelancer, and that is it.
The whole point of intellectual property is that you *own* your work.
If write a book and make copies to give to someone else, I should be paid for every copy - not just for the hours (at a fixed rate) I put in to write it in the first place.
If people don't make money for creative pursuits, then no one will be creative.
Whoops... there goes your culture!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832801</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>BasilBrush</author>
	<datestamp>1256203860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think it's a hoax, you probably don't know the PRS. The PRS pay their royalty collectors on commission. They have no interest at all in whether the target of their attentions are morally or legally required to purchase a license. They want to sell one to them regardless. This is just the latest of many such news stories of some of the ridiculous extremes their operatives have tried to extort money from people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think it 's a hoax , you probably do n't know the PRS .
The PRS pay their royalty collectors on commission .
They have no interest at all in whether the target of their attentions are morally or legally required to purchase a license .
They want to sell one to them regardless .
This is just the latest of many such news stories of some of the ridiculous extremes their operatives have tried to extort money from people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think it's a hoax, you probably don't know the PRS.
The PRS pay their royalty collectors on commission.
They have no interest at all in whether the target of their attentions are morally or legally required to purchase a license.
They want to sell one to them regardless.
This is just the latest of many such news stories of some of the ridiculous extremes their operatives have tried to extort money from people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832633</id>
	<title>They do already.</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1256244480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.oed.com/subscribe/" title="oed.com">http://www.oed.com/subscribe/</a> [oed.com]<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.oed.com/subscribe/ [ oed.com ]  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.oed.com/subscribe/ [oed.com]
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834271</id>
	<title>How did the PRS find out?</title>
	<author>yorgo</author>
	<datestamp>1256220600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There had to be some human involvement.  Which means a *person* (from the PRS?) must have shopped in her store, and heard the radio (or her singing), and thought, "Hmmm...This is outrageous!  I'll have to do something about this!  I'll report her!"

So, initially, this began with a single idiot.

I can only assume that this idiot brought back his report, and more *people* at the PRS thought, "This is outrageous!  We'll have to do something about this!".  It was then escalated, which resulted in the initial order.

So, subsequently, this was perpetuated by more idiots.

Somehow, the phrase, "A person is smart.  People are stupid.", doesn't seem to apply here.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There had to be some human involvement .
Which means a * person * ( from the PRS ?
) must have shopped in her store , and heard the radio ( or her singing ) , and thought , " Hmmm...This is outrageous !
I 'll have to do something about this !
I 'll report her !
" So , initially , this began with a single idiot .
I can only assume that this idiot brought back his report , and more * people * at the PRS thought , " This is outrageous !
We 'll have to do something about this ! " .
It was then escalated , which resulted in the initial order .
So , subsequently , this was perpetuated by more idiots .
Somehow , the phrase , " A person is smart .
People are stupid .
" , does n't seem to apply here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There had to be some human involvement.
Which means a *person* (from the PRS?
) must have shopped in her store, and heard the radio (or her singing), and thought, "Hmmm...This is outrageous!
I'll have to do something about this!
I'll report her!
"

So, initially, this began with a single idiot.
I can only assume that this idiot brought back his report, and more *people* at the PRS thought, "This is outrageous!
We'll have to do something about this!".
It was then escalated, which resulted in the initial order.
So, subsequently, this was perpetuated by more idiots.
Somehow, the phrase, "A person is smart.
People are stupid.
", doesn't seem to apply here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833921</id>
	<title>Re:I personally welcome the silence!</title>
	<author>alder</author>
	<datestamp>1256218080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I enjoy some nice, well deserved and for now completely free silence</p></div></blockquote><p>
Sir, you, maybe without realizing it, are performing, non stop, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4\%E2\%80\%B233\%E2\%80\%B3" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">4'33"</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I enjoy some nice , well deserved and for now completely free silence Sir , you , maybe without realizing it , are performing , non stop , the 4'33 " [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I enjoy some nice, well deserved and for now completely free silence
Sir, you, maybe without realizing it, are performing, non stop, the 4'33" [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835271</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>flibuste</author>
	<datestamp>1256227020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're right..Ah wel..."Never mind..." then(m)</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right..Ah wel... " Never mind... " then ( m )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right..Ah wel..."Never mind..." then(m)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837815</id>
	<title>Re:the solution</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1256237460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right on man. I for one have not bought a single RIAA album since 2000. But I will glady visit them at a local venue and support them directly. Sadly the venue scene here is slowly becoming a similar RIAA, with TicketMaster and their ilk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right on man .
I for one have not bought a single RIAA album since 2000 .
But I will glady visit them at a local venue and support them directly .
Sadly the venue scene here is slowly becoming a similar RIAA , with TicketMaster and their ilk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right on man.
I for one have not bought a single RIAA album since 2000.
But I will glady visit them at a local venue and support them directly.
Sadly the venue scene here is slowly becoming a similar RIAA, with TicketMaster and their ilk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283</id>
	<title>Yeah, but remember people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>She's an old f'*k that sings, hence disturbing my personal belief of finding my true love while grocery-shopping.</p><p>In the fuits section.</p><p>While testing melons.</p><p>Juicy... melons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... garrrr<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>She 's an old f ' * k that sings , hence disturbing my personal belief of finding my true love while grocery-shopping.In the fuits section.While testing melons.Juicy... melons ... garrrr .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She's an old f'*k that sings, hence disturbing my personal belief of finding my true love while grocery-shopping.In the fuits section.While testing melons.Juicy... melons ... garrrr ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833763</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are you - some sort of conspiracy theory nut? Everyone knows that if it's reported in the news, then it must be true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are you - some sort of conspiracy theory nut ?
Everyone knows that if it 's reported in the news , then it must be true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are you - some sort of conspiracy theory nut?
Everyone knows that if it's reported in the news, then it must be true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834281</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256220600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't matter. It is a public performance if it is played in the workplace and more than one person can hear it. Under current copyright law the PRS was quite correct to go after the supermarket for ambient music at work, even for staff. Going after a woman for humming a song to herself is ludicrous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't matter .
It is a public performance if it is played in the workplace and more than one person can hear it .
Under current copyright law the PRS was quite correct to go after the supermarket for ambient music at work , even for staff .
Going after a woman for humming a song to herself is ludicrous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't matter.
It is a public performance if it is played in the workplace and more than one person can hear it.
Under current copyright law the PRS was quite correct to go after the supermarket for ambient music at work, even for staff.
Going after a woman for humming a song to herself is ludicrous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833361</id>
	<title>Learn 2 economics</title>
	<author>definate</author>
	<datestamp>1256211540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've brought up some of the common arguments for licensing, however you've missed quite a lot in your argument. Given this is an economics topic you're talking about, you need to analyze the situation using it, else you're just ignoring a large body of study on the very topic you're talking about.</p><p>What you're talking about here are positive externalities. You believe that these organizations benefit from the works of the artists, yet they do not have to pay for the production of these works. This means they benefit from the surplus generated by the artists, yet bare none of the cost. That's fine, however you're missing an understanding of the larger market and the complexities in pricing an externality.</p><p>Given you opt for regulation, the regulator essentially becomes a monopoly which has control over the distribution of these works. This means the regulator can set the price of the externality and the quantity supplied, which drives up the cost for these businesses. Since the regulator does not operate in a market (there might be some faux market, such as buying credits or similar, I'm unsure in this instance), it has no competition, nor does it have the price mechanism to discover the price of this good. This results in the regulator arbitrarily setting the price, given people don't break the law (most would), then we would see less of these works being distributed, and a higher price being paid. This means the regulator would be able to apply downward pressure on the price paid to it's clients, and take a larger amount of the surplus.</p><p>I'm going to leave it there, since it's a much larger topic and ridiculously more complex than I've put it. Especially since there is a market for regulation and it would require us to take into account rent seeking, which includes lobbying. However, we can see that this organization would be granted an extreme amount of control on the music industry, where it could (and would) be able to maximize its own revenue at the sake of the businesses which consume the benefit and the businesses which produce it.</p><p>Lets look at it from the other side. You've said songwriters aren't a particularly wealthy lot and you're right. Yet they exist, why is that? Well, song writing has a large amount of intangible benefits, from being associated with it, to sharing your creative works, etc. This means that although it may cost you, you'll still do it, because it still provides benefit to you. Additionally, it can take you $0 to write a song and very little to make it. As distribution, production and marketing costs continue to plummet, we're likely to see less and less money made by these artists, as they assume barley any risk and have a large intangible up side. I hang around a fair few musicians and song writers, most of whom do not make money from it, despite the fact that they are always performing. They call this "Pay to play", where you essentially do it for the fun, excitement and similar.</p><p>In a regulated market like this, the businesses which consume the benefit (supermarkets, radio stations, etc) have imposed on them large costs, and the businesses which produce the benefit (musicians, songwriters, etc) receive small benefits from it (due to the downward pressure from the monopolist). This means if businesses which consume the benefit want to stay in business, they need to find revenue streams which are more profitable, as no matter what, they have these costs imposed on them. In this case businesses who produce this benefit and are confident in their ability to generate returns, have an incentive to offset these costs. This means they spend on advertising through the organization, perhaps pay them to play the song, or similar. This means that only larger organizations which are willing to take on the risk that they won't receive enough returns to offset this cost, are the ones who get played the most. Additionally, since we know that these artists aren't "a particularly wealthy lot", we know that these people are going to seek financing to get their music made. Thi</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've brought up some of the common arguments for licensing , however you 've missed quite a lot in your argument .
Given this is an economics topic you 're talking about , you need to analyze the situation using it , else you 're just ignoring a large body of study on the very topic you 're talking about.What you 're talking about here are positive externalities .
You believe that these organizations benefit from the works of the artists , yet they do not have to pay for the production of these works .
This means they benefit from the surplus generated by the artists , yet bare none of the cost .
That 's fine , however you 're missing an understanding of the larger market and the complexities in pricing an externality.Given you opt for regulation , the regulator essentially becomes a monopoly which has control over the distribution of these works .
This means the regulator can set the price of the externality and the quantity supplied , which drives up the cost for these businesses .
Since the regulator does not operate in a market ( there might be some faux market , such as buying credits or similar , I 'm unsure in this instance ) , it has no competition , nor does it have the price mechanism to discover the price of this good .
This results in the regulator arbitrarily setting the price , given people do n't break the law ( most would ) , then we would see less of these works being distributed , and a higher price being paid .
This means the regulator would be able to apply downward pressure on the price paid to it 's clients , and take a larger amount of the surplus.I 'm going to leave it there , since it 's a much larger topic and ridiculously more complex than I 've put it .
Especially since there is a market for regulation and it would require us to take into account rent seeking , which includes lobbying .
However , we can see that this organization would be granted an extreme amount of control on the music industry , where it could ( and would ) be able to maximize its own revenue at the sake of the businesses which consume the benefit and the businesses which produce it.Lets look at it from the other side .
You 've said songwriters are n't a particularly wealthy lot and you 're right .
Yet they exist , why is that ?
Well , song writing has a large amount of intangible benefits , from being associated with it , to sharing your creative works , etc .
This means that although it may cost you , you 'll still do it , because it still provides benefit to you .
Additionally , it can take you $ 0 to write a song and very little to make it .
As distribution , production and marketing costs continue to plummet , we 're likely to see less and less money made by these artists , as they assume barley any risk and have a large intangible up side .
I hang around a fair few musicians and song writers , most of whom do not make money from it , despite the fact that they are always performing .
They call this " Pay to play " , where you essentially do it for the fun , excitement and similar.In a regulated market like this , the businesses which consume the benefit ( supermarkets , radio stations , etc ) have imposed on them large costs , and the businesses which produce the benefit ( musicians , songwriters , etc ) receive small benefits from it ( due to the downward pressure from the monopolist ) .
This means if businesses which consume the benefit want to stay in business , they need to find revenue streams which are more profitable , as no matter what , they have these costs imposed on them .
In this case businesses who produce this benefit and are confident in their ability to generate returns , have an incentive to offset these costs .
This means they spend on advertising through the organization , perhaps pay them to play the song , or similar .
This means that only larger organizations which are willing to take on the risk that they wo n't receive enough returns to offset this cost , are the ones who get played the most .
Additionally , since we know that these artists are n't " a particularly wealthy lot " , we know that these people are going to seek financing to get their music made .
Thi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've brought up some of the common arguments for licensing, however you've missed quite a lot in your argument.
Given this is an economics topic you're talking about, you need to analyze the situation using it, else you're just ignoring a large body of study on the very topic you're talking about.What you're talking about here are positive externalities.
You believe that these organizations benefit from the works of the artists, yet they do not have to pay for the production of these works.
This means they benefit from the surplus generated by the artists, yet bare none of the cost.
That's fine, however you're missing an understanding of the larger market and the complexities in pricing an externality.Given you opt for regulation, the regulator essentially becomes a monopoly which has control over the distribution of these works.
This means the regulator can set the price of the externality and the quantity supplied, which drives up the cost for these businesses.
Since the regulator does not operate in a market (there might be some faux market, such as buying credits or similar, I'm unsure in this instance), it has no competition, nor does it have the price mechanism to discover the price of this good.
This results in the regulator arbitrarily setting the price, given people don't break the law (most would), then we would see less of these works being distributed, and a higher price being paid.
This means the regulator would be able to apply downward pressure on the price paid to it's clients, and take a larger amount of the surplus.I'm going to leave it there, since it's a much larger topic and ridiculously more complex than I've put it.
Especially since there is a market for regulation and it would require us to take into account rent seeking, which includes lobbying.
However, we can see that this organization would be granted an extreme amount of control on the music industry, where it could (and would) be able to maximize its own revenue at the sake of the businesses which consume the benefit and the businesses which produce it.Lets look at it from the other side.
You've said songwriters aren't a particularly wealthy lot and you're right.
Yet they exist, why is that?
Well, song writing has a large amount of intangible benefits, from being associated with it, to sharing your creative works, etc.
This means that although it may cost you, you'll still do it, because it still provides benefit to you.
Additionally, it can take you $0 to write a song and very little to make it.
As distribution, production and marketing costs continue to plummet, we're likely to see less and less money made by these artists, as they assume barley any risk and have a large intangible up side.
I hang around a fair few musicians and song writers, most of whom do not make money from it, despite the fact that they are always performing.
They call this "Pay to play", where you essentially do it for the fun, excitement and similar.In a regulated market like this, the businesses which consume the benefit (supermarkets, radio stations, etc) have imposed on them large costs, and the businesses which produce the benefit (musicians, songwriters, etc) receive small benefits from it (due to the downward pressure from the monopolist).
This means if businesses which consume the benefit want to stay in business, they need to find revenue streams which are more profitable, as no matter what, they have these costs imposed on them.
In this case businesses who produce this benefit and are confident in their ability to generate returns, have an incentive to offset these costs.
This means they spend on advertising through the organization, perhaps pay them to play the song, or similar.
This means that only larger organizations which are willing to take on the risk that they won't receive enough returns to offset this cost, are the ones who get played the most.
Additionally, since we know that these artists aren't "a particularly wealthy lot", we know that these people are going to seek financing to get their music made.
Thi</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833229</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>definate</author>
	<datestamp>1256209380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt this is a hoax. This happens quite a lot in Australia, but it doesn't usually get quite so much publicity, and it usually happens to night clubs, pubs, private halls, radio stations and similar.</p><p>The regulatory body over here which primarially deals with this is called the <a href="http://www.apra-amcos.com.au/About/AboutAPRAAMCOS.aspx" title="apra-amcos.com.au">Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA)</a> [apra-amcos.com.au], basically if you want to perform a copy righted work, you need to obtain licensing.</p><p>For instance I work for a small organization which uses some of it's land for small private concerts, of a maximum of 20 people, generally playing classical works, though occasionally other stuff. Under Australian law we had to obtain licensing through APRA for us to be able to hold these private events.</p><p>A friend of the family used to work for them and although they believed in what they were doing (They saw it as standing up for the rights of the artists against profiteering companies), they did have stories on how some businesses couldn't/wouldn't pay the licensing fees, so they monitored the events closely and pursed legal action. Though in most cases the businesses just give up. Though they did have stories of how they omnipotently gave the licensing, regardless of the businesses right to pay, for the good of the people. Both of which made me sick.</p><p>Anyhow, I took this person to task on the topic one night and suffice to say we're not family friends with them anymore.</p><p>I think it's for the best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt this is a hoax .
This happens quite a lot in Australia , but it does n't usually get quite so much publicity , and it usually happens to night clubs , pubs , private halls , radio stations and similar.The regulatory body over here which primarially deals with this is called the Australasian Performing Right Association ( APRA ) [ apra-amcos.com.au ] , basically if you want to perform a copy righted work , you need to obtain licensing.For instance I work for a small organization which uses some of it 's land for small private concerts , of a maximum of 20 people , generally playing classical works , though occasionally other stuff .
Under Australian law we had to obtain licensing through APRA for us to be able to hold these private events.A friend of the family used to work for them and although they believed in what they were doing ( They saw it as standing up for the rights of the artists against profiteering companies ) , they did have stories on how some businesses could n't/would n't pay the licensing fees , so they monitored the events closely and pursed legal action .
Though in most cases the businesses just give up .
Though they did have stories of how they omnipotently gave the licensing , regardless of the businesses right to pay , for the good of the people .
Both of which made me sick.Anyhow , I took this person to task on the topic one night and suffice to say we 're not family friends with them anymore.I think it 's for the best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt this is a hoax.
This happens quite a lot in Australia, but it doesn't usually get quite so much publicity, and it usually happens to night clubs, pubs, private halls, radio stations and similar.The regulatory body over here which primarially deals with this is called the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA) [apra-amcos.com.au], basically if you want to perform a copy righted work, you need to obtain licensing.For instance I work for a small organization which uses some of it's land for small private concerts, of a maximum of 20 people, generally playing classical works, though occasionally other stuff.
Under Australian law we had to obtain licensing through APRA for us to be able to hold these private events.A friend of the family used to work for them and although they believed in what they were doing (They saw it as standing up for the rights of the artists against profiteering companies), they did have stories on how some businesses couldn't/wouldn't pay the licensing fees, so they monitored the events closely and pursed legal action.
Though in most cases the businesses just give up.
Though they did have stories of how they omnipotently gave the licensing, regardless of the businesses right to pay, for the good of the people.
Both of which made me sick.Anyhow, I took this person to task on the topic one night and suffice to say we're not family friends with them anymore.I think it's for the best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832373</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256153640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope that one nice dinner a year is worth it.</p><p>I hate you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope that one nice dinner a year is worth it.I hate you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope that one nice dinner a year is worth it.I hate you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836161</id>
	<title>I'm shocked that this happened</title>
	<author>KiwiCanuck</author>
	<datestamp>1256230680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>in the UK b4 the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>in the UK b4 the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the UK b4 the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833389</id>
	<title>Pitbulls.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256212020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You breed, the fight is exhilarating, then you wake up and the nightmare of mutilated living things (just like war, btw).</p><p>Then you decide it was not such a good idea to create the race in the first place.</p><p>What now?</p><p>SImple, but hard to do: prohibit further breeding.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Same thing with lawyers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You breed , the fight is exhilarating , then you wake up and the nightmare of mutilated living things ( just like war , btw ) .Then you decide it was not such a good idea to create the race in the first place.What now ? SImple , but hard to do : prohibit further breeding .
...Same thing with lawyers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You breed, the fight is exhilarating, then you wake up and the nightmare of mutilated living things (just like war, btw).Then you decide it was not such a good idea to create the race in the first place.What now?SImple, but hard to do: prohibit further breeding.
...Same thing with lawyers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840883</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>pipedwho</author>
	<datestamp>1256210340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Some do, it's called rent.  The choice is to either buy everything outright, or pay a fee for it's use on an ongoing basis.  You could buy the right sto a song; just as you can a building; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it's use (and the stuff inside) without every owning anything.</p></div><p>Actually you're quite right, it's very similar:</p><p>When renting a building, imagine that the landlord was then obligated to seek out every manufacturer of fittings, paints, carpets, lino, furniture, etc. And pay them ongoing royalties. That's too hard.</p><p>So lets just let the landlord collect and keep that 'rent'! Much simpler to administer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some do , it 's called rent .
The choice is to either buy everything outright , or pay a fee for it 's use on an ongoing basis .
You could buy the right sto a song ; just as you can a building ; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it 's use ( and the stuff inside ) without every owning anything.Actually you 're quite right , it 's very similar : When renting a building , imagine that the landlord was then obligated to seek out every manufacturer of fittings , paints , carpets , lino , furniture , etc .
And pay them ongoing royalties .
That 's too hard.So lets just let the landlord collect and keep that 'rent ' !
Much simpler to administer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some do, it's called rent.
The choice is to either buy everything outright, or pay a fee for it's use on an ongoing basis.
You could buy the right sto a song; just as you can a building; or simply pay an ongoing fee for it's use (and the stuff inside) without every owning anything.Actually you're quite right, it's very similar:When renting a building, imagine that the landlord was then obligated to seek out every manufacturer of fittings, paints, carpets, lino, furniture, etc.
And pay them ongoing royalties.
That's too hard.So lets just let the landlord collect and keep that 'rent'!
Much simpler to administer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843939</id>
	<title>Oh...</title>
	<author>Cazekiel</author>
	<datestamp>1256295480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't even begin to fathom how utterly SCREWED I'd be. I sing everywhere, including grocery stores. And I don't even WORK in one. And movie quotes? Orson Welles would rise from the grave and slap a lawsuit on me so fast for screaming, "Don't worry about me! Don't worry about me, Geddes! I'm CHARLES FOSTER KANE!" in the Wal-Mart parking lot. Don't ask. Hard day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't even begin to fathom how utterly SCREWED I 'd be .
I sing everywhere , including grocery stores .
And I do n't even WORK in one .
And movie quotes ?
Orson Welles would rise from the grave and slap a lawsuit on me so fast for screaming , " Do n't worry about me !
Do n't worry about me , Geddes !
I 'm CHARLES FOSTER KANE !
" in the Wal-Mart parking lot .
Do n't ask .
Hard day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't even begin to fathom how utterly SCREWED I'd be.
I sing everywhere, including grocery stores.
And I don't even WORK in one.
And movie quotes?
Orson Welles would rise from the grave and slap a lawsuit on me so fast for screaming, "Don't worry about me!
Don't worry about me, Geddes!
I'm CHARLES FOSTER KANE!
" in the Wal-Mart parking lot.
Don't ask.
Hard day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29848339</id>
	<title>Fine with me</title>
	<author>coldsalmon</author>
	<datestamp>1256323020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So eventually people won't be able to sing or listen to horrible pop tunes that are written only for monetary gain.  This is what I've been hoping for my whole life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So eventually people wo n't be able to sing or listen to horrible pop tunes that are written only for monetary gain .
This is what I 've been hoping for my whole life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So eventually people won't be able to sing or listen to horrible pop tunes that are written only for monetary gain.
This is what I've been hoping for my whole life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836783</id>
	<title>Re:the solution</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1256233440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or better yet: don't, let the stupid artists supporting these organizations starve themselves alongside the scumbags who employed them, and next time you want to hear some music make bloody sure it's available under a CC license in its entirety.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or better yet : do n't , let the stupid artists supporting these organizations starve themselves alongside the scumbags who employed them , and next time you want to hear some music make bloody sure it 's available under a CC license in its entirety .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or better yet: don't, let the stupid artists supporting these organizations starve themselves alongside the scumbags who employed them, and next time you want to hear some music make bloody sure it's available under a CC license in its entirety.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832397</id>
	<title>How much detail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256154000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be difficult to craft laws that would specifically allow singing to yourself, but allow payment for a real performance. One trusts a sense of fairness and common sense to fill in the details. HOWEVER, corporations (and the people who run them, and their lawyers) have lost any shreds of those two things they ever had.</p><p>Let's face it - the chief way to obtain money in the US is rapidly becoming simply to sue someone who has it. Very little new, tangible wealth is being produced. How much money is enough? No amount. So we have silliness like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be difficult to craft laws that would specifically allow singing to yourself , but allow payment for a real performance .
One trusts a sense of fairness and common sense to fill in the details .
HOWEVER , corporations ( and the people who run them , and their lawyers ) have lost any shreds of those two things they ever had.Let 's face it - the chief way to obtain money in the US is rapidly becoming simply to sue someone who has it .
Very little new , tangible wealth is being produced .
How much money is enough ?
No amount .
So we have silliness like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be difficult to craft laws that would specifically allow singing to yourself, but allow payment for a real performance.
One trusts a sense of fairness and common sense to fill in the details.
HOWEVER, corporations (and the people who run them, and their lawyers) have lost any shreds of those two things they ever had.Let's face it - the chief way to obtain money in the US is rapidly becoming simply to sue someone who has it.
Very little new, tangible wealth is being produced.
How much money is enough?
No amount.
So we have silliness like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832821</id>
	<title>crivens</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256204040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>jings and helpmaboab, the noo!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>jings and helpmaboab , the noo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jings and helpmaboab, the noo!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</id>
	<title>What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's next? Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's next ?
Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's next?
Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291</id>
	<title>Brainwashing</title>
	<author>El\_Muerte\_TDS</author>
	<datestamp>1256152380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it is time to sue the music industry for putting songs in our head.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it is time to sue the music industry for putting songs in our head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it is time to sue the music industry for putting songs in our head.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834693</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Baki</author>
	<datestamp>1256223720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a sign that the state should withdraw from providing protection for copyrights and the like, i.e. abolish it 100\%.<br>I do not see any healthy balance, but it just gets more and more absurd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a sign that the state should withdraw from providing protection for copyrights and the like , i.e .
abolish it 100 \ % .I do not see any healthy balance , but it just gets more and more absurd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a sign that the state should withdraw from providing protection for copyrights and the like, i.e.
abolish it 100\%.I do not see any healthy balance, but it just gets more and more absurd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845</id>
	<title>Easy solution - Make $$$$ from it.</title>
	<author>GrpA</author>
	<datestamp>1256204340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How hard would it be for some enterprising radio station to only play GPL/Free/Whatever-isn't-commercial music that the PRS had no jurisdiction over...</p><p>They would quickly be the ONLY radio station that business could listen to ( freely ) and they could sue the PRS if they damaged their business by telling people they couldn't listen to the radio without a license... Since it wouldn't be true of that station. ( Better still the PRS might start to include advertising in their notices... eg, Can't listen to stations, other than Radio-GPL )</p><p>A captive market and a litigious company doing them free PR work - It doesn't get much better than that...</p><p>I wonder how long the PRS would last before the artists realized they were the real enemy...</p><p>GrpA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard would it be for some enterprising radio station to only play GPL/Free/Whatever-is n't-commercial music that the PRS had no jurisdiction over...They would quickly be the ONLY radio station that business could listen to ( freely ) and they could sue the PRS if they damaged their business by telling people they could n't listen to the radio without a license... Since it would n't be true of that station .
( Better still the PRS might start to include advertising in their notices... eg , Ca n't listen to stations , other than Radio-GPL ) A captive market and a litigious company doing them free PR work - It does n't get much better than that...I wonder how long the PRS would last before the artists realized they were the real enemy...GrpA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard would it be for some enterprising radio station to only play GPL/Free/Whatever-isn't-commercial music that the PRS had no jurisdiction over...They would quickly be the ONLY radio station that business could listen to ( freely ) and they could sue the PRS if they damaged their business by telling people they couldn't listen to the radio without a license... Since it wouldn't be true of that station.
( Better still the PRS might start to include advertising in their notices... eg, Can't listen to stations, other than Radio-GPL )A captive market and a litigious company doing them free PR work - It doesn't get much better than that...I wonder how long the PRS would last before the artists realized they were the real enemy...GrpA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837267</id>
	<title>Re:I personally welcome the silence!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256235480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Rock and roll ain't noise pollution!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rock and roll ai n't noise pollution !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rock and roll ain't noise pollution!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833159</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Stanislav\_J</author>
	<datestamp>1256208540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.</p></div><p>Now <i>that</i> is a concept I could embrace, if it serves to keep those young idjits with the mega-bass boom boxes on wheels from cruising my neighborhood and disturbing my peace.</p><p>(Insert obligatory "now get off my lawn" meme here...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.Now that is a concept I could embrace , if it serves to keep those young idjits with the mega-bass boom boxes on wheels from cruising my neighborhood and disturbing my peace .
( Insert obligatory " now get off my lawn " meme here... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.Now that is a concept I could embrace, if it serves to keep those young idjits with the mega-bass boom boxes on wheels from cruising my neighborhood and disturbing my peace.
(Insert obligatory "now get off my lawn" meme here...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832221</id>
	<title>Correction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's spelled "Crack-manna-shire"... At least it should be...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's spelled " Crack-manna-shire " ... At least it should be.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's spelled "Crack-manna-shire"... At least it should be...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256214240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a musician.  I have had placed I play threatened with legal action because the club hadn't paid ASCAP &amp; BMI to allow them a performing license to allow me to play original music in that venue.  And despite me not being represented by BMI I have the "right" to opt in at a later time so they are "entitled" to collect money until I decide to do so.  You can opt out of Sound Exchange but BMI and ASCAP are organizations that act on our behalf whether or not we would like.</p><p>The whole situation where all musicians are assumed to opt in and then must jump through hoops to get payments is a joke.  As a small musician I am not showing up on the radio charts and since I have been in a dozen bands it would be a pain to collect checks for under a dollar for each group.  It is not like the clubs report that I am playing there and that the set is all originals and that the BMI should not collect any fees from them that day.  So the associations collect their fees and then figure that some major artist was being played because they base their calculations off of radio play.</p><p>It is also annoying as it makes it impossible to may a truly free college or internet radio station.  Even if I only played my own tunes I would have to pay a fee to do so and then register to get it back minus administrative overhead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a musician .
I have had placed I play threatened with legal action because the club had n't paid ASCAP &amp; BMI to allow them a performing license to allow me to play original music in that venue .
And despite me not being represented by BMI I have the " right " to opt in at a later time so they are " entitled " to collect money until I decide to do so .
You can opt out of Sound Exchange but BMI and ASCAP are organizations that act on our behalf whether or not we would like.The whole situation where all musicians are assumed to opt in and then must jump through hoops to get payments is a joke .
As a small musician I am not showing up on the radio charts and since I have been in a dozen bands it would be a pain to collect checks for under a dollar for each group .
It is not like the clubs report that I am playing there and that the set is all originals and that the BMI should not collect any fees from them that day .
So the associations collect their fees and then figure that some major artist was being played because they base their calculations off of radio play.It is also annoying as it makes it impossible to may a truly free college or internet radio station .
Even if I only played my own tunes I would have to pay a fee to do so and then register to get it back minus administrative overhead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a musician.
I have had placed I play threatened with legal action because the club hadn't paid ASCAP &amp; BMI to allow them a performing license to allow me to play original music in that venue.
And despite me not being represented by BMI I have the "right" to opt in at a later time so they are "entitled" to collect money until I decide to do so.
You can opt out of Sound Exchange but BMI and ASCAP are organizations that act on our behalf whether or not we would like.The whole situation where all musicians are assumed to opt in and then must jump through hoops to get payments is a joke.
As a small musician I am not showing up on the radio charts and since I have been in a dozen bands it would be a pain to collect checks for under a dollar for each group.
It is not like the clubs report that I am playing there and that the set is all originals and that the BMI should not collect any fees from them that day.
So the associations collect their fees and then figure that some major artist was being played because they base their calculations off of radio play.It is also annoying as it makes it impossible to may a truly free college or internet radio station.
Even if I only played my own tunes I would have to pay a fee to do so and then register to get it back minus administrative overhead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834083</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>whosyourslashdotdad</author>
	<datestamp>1256219340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the club not paying ASCAP/BMI may have other nights where they have cover bands or a DJ though. Generally ASCAP/BMI doesn't trust them to be honest about their revenues (from my experience with club owners it's rightfully so).  They could decline to pay if they never played licensed music, but if they ever do then they owe a portion of their revenues.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the club not paying ASCAP/BMI may have other nights where they have cover bands or a DJ though .
Generally ASCAP/BMI does n't trust them to be honest about their revenues ( from my experience with club owners it 's rightfully so ) .
They could decline to pay if they never played licensed music , but if they ever do then they owe a portion of their revenues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the club not paying ASCAP/BMI may have other nights where they have cover bands or a DJ though.
Generally ASCAP/BMI doesn't trust them to be honest about their revenues (from my experience with club owners it's rightfully so).
They could decline to pay if they never played licensed music, but if they ever do then they owe a portion of their revenues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833403</id>
	<title>Re:kindle text to speech</title>
	<author>JoeInnes</author>
	<datestamp>1256212260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A teacher reading a book in class is doing it for educational purposes. There is a practical difference, and I believe there is a difference in law, although IANAL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A teacher reading a book in class is doing it for educational purposes .
There is a practical difference , and I believe there is a difference in law , although IANAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A teacher reading a book in class is doing it for educational purposes.
There is a practical difference, and I believe there is a difference in law, although IANAL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699</id>
	<title>It's amazing what people accept...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256202480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To people outside the UK, charging you for playing the radio makes no damn sense.  After all, the radio station already pays for the music (if it's a standard broadcast) or *you* already pay for the music if it's satellite or CD.</p><p>The only reason people like the OP can rationalize the PRS is because they're looking at it through the lens of a culture in which it's the status quo.  You see this all the time - people rationalizing or even praising elements of their particular culture that MAKE NO GODDAMN SENSE.  I'm not sure whether it's done out of a sort of misplaced nationalism, a lack of imagination, or something else.  But it's the only explanation I can think of for the defense of the indefensible, whether it's the PRS, the American health care system, or any other country's unique psychosis.</p><p>The irony is that for the vast majority of musicians in the UK, the burden the PRS puts on people is vastly disproportionate to the benefit received.  Again, take the original poster - would s/he give up that one dinner a year in order to save business owners the incredible hassle of dealing with the PRS?  Not to mention the massive amount of money the PRS must spend on enforcement, which reduces the artists' cut.  If the PRS moved to a system where royalties for recording sales and broadcast were higher, and eliminated the tax on playing music in public, how much more profitable would they be?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To people outside the UK , charging you for playing the radio makes no damn sense .
After all , the radio station already pays for the music ( if it 's a standard broadcast ) or * you * already pay for the music if it 's satellite or CD.The only reason people like the OP can rationalize the PRS is because they 're looking at it through the lens of a culture in which it 's the status quo .
You see this all the time - people rationalizing or even praising elements of their particular culture that MAKE NO GODDAMN SENSE .
I 'm not sure whether it 's done out of a sort of misplaced nationalism , a lack of imagination , or something else .
But it 's the only explanation I can think of for the defense of the indefensible , whether it 's the PRS , the American health care system , or any other country 's unique psychosis.The irony is that for the vast majority of musicians in the UK , the burden the PRS puts on people is vastly disproportionate to the benefit received .
Again , take the original poster - would s/he give up that one dinner a year in order to save business owners the incredible hassle of dealing with the PRS ?
Not to mention the massive amount of money the PRS must spend on enforcement , which reduces the artists ' cut .
If the PRS moved to a system where royalties for recording sales and broadcast were higher , and eliminated the tax on playing music in public , how much more profitable would they be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To people outside the UK, charging you for playing the radio makes no damn sense.
After all, the radio station already pays for the music (if it's a standard broadcast) or *you* already pay for the music if it's satellite or CD.The only reason people like the OP can rationalize the PRS is because they're looking at it through the lens of a culture in which it's the status quo.
You see this all the time - people rationalizing or even praising elements of their particular culture that MAKE NO GODDAMN SENSE.
I'm not sure whether it's done out of a sort of misplaced nationalism, a lack of imagination, or something else.
But it's the only explanation I can think of for the defense of the indefensible, whether it's the PRS, the American health care system, or any other country's unique psychosis.The irony is that for the vast majority of musicians in the UK, the burden the PRS puts on people is vastly disproportionate to the benefit received.
Again, take the original poster - would s/he give up that one dinner a year in order to save business owners the incredible hassle of dealing with the PRS?
Not to mention the massive amount of money the PRS must spend on enforcement, which reduces the artists' cut.
If the PRS moved to a system where royalties for recording sales and broadcast were higher, and eliminated the tax on playing music in public, how much more profitable would they be?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832777</id>
	<title>Re:Silver lining?</title>
	<author>putaro</author>
	<datestamp>1256203620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sign me up too!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sign me up too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sign me up too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837605</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution to all this stupidity</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1256236800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason this wouldn't work is because copyrights have such idiotic and broad scope that this <em>was</em> a violation of the copyright. No court wants to permit lawsuits over singing while you work even if it <em>is</em> a violation of the copyright, but if it was either that or take away the copyright they'd be forced to uphold and enforce the copyright.</p><p>You perform copyrighted works in public, you are legally required to pay royalties. If you have a movie night for your friends, it is a private showing, but if you tack fliers to bulletin boards and let anyone in it's a public showing and you have to get permission from the copyright holder. Anyone can walk into a grocery store, so playing copyrighted music over the PA system constitutes a public performance and you're violating the copyright.</p><p>As I said, enforcing these laws to this asinine level is idiotic, but if they were enforced as written these things would be violations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason this would n't work is because copyrights have such idiotic and broad scope that this was a violation of the copyright .
No court wants to permit lawsuits over singing while you work even if it is a violation of the copyright , but if it was either that or take away the copyright they 'd be forced to uphold and enforce the copyright.You perform copyrighted works in public , you are legally required to pay royalties .
If you have a movie night for your friends , it is a private showing , but if you tack fliers to bulletin boards and let anyone in it 's a public showing and you have to get permission from the copyright holder .
Anyone can walk into a grocery store , so playing copyrighted music over the PA system constitutes a public performance and you 're violating the copyright.As I said , enforcing these laws to this asinine level is idiotic , but if they were enforced as written these things would be violations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason this wouldn't work is because copyrights have such idiotic and broad scope that this was a violation of the copyright.
No court wants to permit lawsuits over singing while you work even if it is a violation of the copyright, but if it was either that or take away the copyright they'd be forced to uphold and enforce the copyright.You perform copyrighted works in public, you are legally required to pay royalties.
If you have a movie night for your friends, it is a private showing, but if you tack fliers to bulletin boards and let anyone in it's a public showing and you have to get permission from the copyright holder.
Anyone can walk into a grocery store, so playing copyrighted music over the PA system constitutes a public performance and you're violating the copyright.As I said, enforcing these laws to this asinine level is idiotic, but if they were enforced as written these things would be violations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834161</id>
	<title>drop downs</title>
	<author>McGiraf</author>
	<datestamp>1256219760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Moderation drop downs, easy to chose the wrong one, no undo except posting, therefore this post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Moderation drop downs , easy to chose the wrong one , no undo except posting , therefore this post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moderation drop downs, easy to chose the wrong one, no undo except posting, therefore this post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840629</id>
	<title>Re:the solution</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1256208600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with that solution is that you're still supporting the system you claim to oppose.</p><p>When you download songs that are owned by an PRS or RIAA (or other equivalent, depending on your country) member label and don't pay them, you give them an excuse to claim that piracy is killing their business and that they deserve all kinds of special legal treatment. We know their "piracy" statistics are completely made up, but if someone ever goes out there and does a scientific survey of piracy, your downloads push the real numbers slightly closer to the made-up ones. And when you support RIAA-affiliated bands by buying a concert ticket or merchandise, you support the RIAA-affiliated labels. Once artists/bands start to realize that the RIAA is hurting their fans, they'll stop signing contracts with them.</p><p>There is lots of good independent music out there being made by people who care more about their music than how much money it makes them or how often they get played on the radio. More is arriving all the time since music production and distribution are incredibly cheap these days. The "music industry" is obsolete. By illegally downloading their music, you're not sticking it to anyone. You're propping up a business model that's on its final legs and is determined to take anyone it can down with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with that solution is that you 're still supporting the system you claim to oppose.When you download songs that are owned by an PRS or RIAA ( or other equivalent , depending on your country ) member label and do n't pay them , you give them an excuse to claim that piracy is killing their business and that they deserve all kinds of special legal treatment .
We know their " piracy " statistics are completely made up , but if someone ever goes out there and does a scientific survey of piracy , your downloads push the real numbers slightly closer to the made-up ones .
And when you support RIAA-affiliated bands by buying a concert ticket or merchandise , you support the RIAA-affiliated labels .
Once artists/bands start to realize that the RIAA is hurting their fans , they 'll stop signing contracts with them.There is lots of good independent music out there being made by people who care more about their music than how much money it makes them or how often they get played on the radio .
More is arriving all the time since music production and distribution are incredibly cheap these days .
The " music industry " is obsolete .
By illegally downloading their music , you 're not sticking it to anyone .
You 're propping up a business model that 's on its final legs and is determined to take anyone it can down with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with that solution is that you're still supporting the system you claim to oppose.When you download songs that are owned by an PRS or RIAA (or other equivalent, depending on your country) member label and don't pay them, you give them an excuse to claim that piracy is killing their business and that they deserve all kinds of special legal treatment.
We know their "piracy" statistics are completely made up, but if someone ever goes out there and does a scientific survey of piracy, your downloads push the real numbers slightly closer to the made-up ones.
And when you support RIAA-affiliated bands by buying a concert ticket or merchandise, you support the RIAA-affiliated labels.
Once artists/bands start to realize that the RIAA is hurting their fans, they'll stop signing contracts with them.There is lots of good independent music out there being made by people who care more about their music than how much money it makes them or how often they get played on the radio.
More is arriving all the time since music production and distribution are incredibly cheap these days.
The "music industry" is obsolete.
By illegally downloading their music, you're not sticking it to anyone.
You're propping up a business model that's on its final legs and is determined to take anyone it can down with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834367</id>
	<title>This Just In:</title>
	<author>Neutral\_Observer</author>
	<datestamp>1256221260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>RIAA now going after people who sing in their showers...</htmltext>
<tokenext>RIAA now going after people who sing in their showers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIAA now going after people who sing in their showers...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837761</id>
	<title>Re:Japan: been there, done that</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1256237340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you haven't yet seen it. I suggest you check out the film Idiocracy. Though it doesn't directly related to this sotry, it shows our logical progression if we keep following these thieves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have n't yet seen it .
I suggest you check out the film Idiocracy .
Though it does n't directly related to this sotry , it shows our logical progression if we keep following these thieves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you haven't yet seen it.
I suggest you check out the film Idiocracy.
Though it doesn't directly related to this sotry, it shows our logical progression if we keep following these thieves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838777</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256241960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Totally OT, but I just had to say THANK YOU for buying the music you get from indie labels and artists<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... in the long run, illegal downloading may not personally hurt a mega-star, but it destroys the careers of independent artists before they even start<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... which helps the mega-star since he no longer has to compete.</p><p>Folks who steal music and claim they're doing it to "screw the man" are actually helping big labels by denying money to young artists.  Folks like you who make a conscious decision about where they are going to spend their money are the ones who affect real and positive change.</p><p>I'm sure you can tell I have a personal stake in this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... which is why I'm posting as AC<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally OT , but I just had to say THANK YOU for buying the music you get from indie labels and artists ... in the long run , illegal downloading may not personally hurt a mega-star , but it destroys the careers of independent artists before they even start ... which helps the mega-star since he no longer has to compete.Folks who steal music and claim they 're doing it to " screw the man " are actually helping big labels by denying money to young artists .
Folks like you who make a conscious decision about where they are going to spend their money are the ones who affect real and positive change.I 'm sure you can tell I have a personal stake in this ... which is why I 'm posting as AC .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally OT, but I just had to say THANK YOU for buying the music you get from indie labels and artists ... in the long run, illegal downloading may not personally hurt a mega-star, but it destroys the careers of independent artists before they even start ... which helps the mega-star since he no longer has to compete.Folks who steal music and claim they're doing it to "screw the man" are actually helping big labels by denying money to young artists.
Folks like you who make a conscious decision about where they are going to spend their money are the ones who affect real and positive change.I'm sure you can tell I have a personal stake in this ... which is why I'm posting as AC ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834171</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1256219820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think legally you were better off doing the radio-- as has been pointed out, you can at least argue there that the public has already "paid" for that thru advertising / radio station paying the labels.  CDs make the situation worse I think.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think legally you were better off doing the radio-- as has been pointed out , you can at least argue there that the public has already " paid " for that thru advertising / radio station paying the labels .
CDs make the situation worse I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think legally you were better off doing the radio-- as has been pointed out, you can at least argue there that the public has already "paid" for that thru advertising / radio station paying the labels.
CDs make the situation worse I think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834103</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>CowboyBob500</author>
	<datestamp>1256219460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.</i>
<br> <br>
I'm a songwriter and am NOT a member of the PRS. Doesn't stop those thieving bastards collecting royalties on my behalf that I don't want. It's impossible for me to play my OWN DAMN SONGS in public without the venue paying the PRS tax. It's impossible to opt out so I hope you haven't paid any kind of membership fee. You're also delusional if you think they are looking out for your interests. For the cost of your nice dinner, they've had numerous corporate lunches and a box at Stamford Bridge on the "administrative fees".</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS .
I 'm a songwriter and am NOT a member of the PRS .
Does n't stop those thieving bastards collecting royalties on my behalf that I do n't want .
It 's impossible for me to play my OWN DAMN SONGS in public without the venue paying the PRS tax .
It 's impossible to opt out so I hope you have n't paid any kind of membership fee .
You 're also delusional if you think they are looking out for your interests .
For the cost of your nice dinner , they 've had numerous corporate lunches and a box at Stamford Bridge on the " administrative fees " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.
I'm a songwriter and am NOT a member of the PRS.
Doesn't stop those thieving bastards collecting royalties on my behalf that I don't want.
It's impossible for me to play my OWN DAMN SONGS in public without the venue paying the PRS tax.
It's impossible to opt out so I hope you haven't paid any kind of membership fee.
You're also delusional if you think they are looking out for your interests.
For the cost of your nice dinner, they've had numerous corporate lunches and a box at Stamford Bridge on the "administrative fees".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837877</id>
	<title>Re:They've gotten all they will get from me</title>
	<author>Knara</author>
	<datestamp>1256237700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People used to say the "hair bands" of my day lacked talent. Yet, that era lasted what, 4 years, and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.</p></div><p>Arguably it started with KISS and ended shortly after "Nevermind" was released (though there were some good hard rock -&gt; grunge transition bands -- Alice in Chains, for example).
</p><p>That'd make it ~20 years (1972 to ~1992).
</p><p>It's worth noting that a lot of those bands weren't particularly good, but in those days there was no easy way to get good copies of songs or distribute them in huge numbers without effort (basically, dual-deck boom boxes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D ), so the royalty system still *worked* and paid artists reasonably fairly.
</p><p>I think the saddest thing about P2P/torrent music piracy is the loss of popular music culture.  It used to be that every town had dozens of great record stores and venues where you could see live music.  Now everyone sits at home, pulls up iTunes/TPB/whatever and downloads to their hearts' content.   So sad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People used to say the " hair bands " of my day lacked talent .
Yet , that era lasted what , 4 years , and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.Arguably it started with KISS and ended shortly after " Nevermind " was released ( though there were some good hard rock - &gt; grunge transition bands -- Alice in Chains , for example ) .
That 'd make it ~ 20 years ( 1972 to ~ 1992 ) .
It 's worth noting that a lot of those bands were n't particularly good , but in those days there was no easy way to get good copies of songs or distribute them in huge numbers without effort ( basically , dual-deck boom boxes : D ) , so the royalty system still * worked * and paid artists reasonably fairly .
I think the saddest thing about P2P/torrent music piracy is the loss of popular music culture .
It used to be that every town had dozens of great record stores and venues where you could see live music .
Now everyone sits at home , pulls up iTunes/TPB/whatever and downloads to their hearts ' content .
So sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People used to say the "hair bands" of my day lacked talent.
Yet, that era lasted what, 4 years, and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.Arguably it started with KISS and ended shortly after "Nevermind" was released (though there were some good hard rock -&gt; grunge transition bands -- Alice in Chains, for example).
That'd make it ~20 years (1972 to ~1992).
It's worth noting that a lot of those bands weren't particularly good, but in those days there was no easy way to get good copies of songs or distribute them in huge numbers without effort (basically, dual-deck boom boxes :D ), so the royalty system still *worked* and paid artists reasonably fairly.
I think the saddest thing about P2P/torrent music piracy is the loss of popular music culture.
It used to be that every town had dozens of great record stores and venues where you could see live music.
Now everyone sits at home, pulls up iTunes/TPB/whatever and downloads to their hearts' content.
So sad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841309</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256213220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs...</p></div><p>Two can play that game: I want to see Oxford's publishers counter-sue all songwriters for using "their" words in these songs.<br>Makes about as much sense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs...Two can play that game : I want to see Oxford 's publishers counter-sue all songwriters for using " their " words in these songs.Makes about as much sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs...Two can play that game: I want to see Oxford's publishers counter-sue all songwriters for using "their" words in these songs.Makes about as much sense.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834587</id>
	<title>Make your own songs...</title>
	<author>afortaleza</author>
	<datestamp>1256222940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...and don't attach copyright to them, that's the best way to go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...and do n't attach copyright to them , that 's the best way to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and don't attach copyright to them, that's the best way to go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832951</id>
	<title>Simple logic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256206140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While there may be many grey areas in practice which is what we have courts for, why not base these things on the simple logic of..</p><p>Is the person using the product to make profit?<br>(Using a hit song as a soundtrack in a movie)</p><p>Is the person representing the product in a way that would damage the companies reputation or business model?<br>(selling cheap fake apple computers)</p><p>I'm so confused as to why if someone clearly isn't damaging their brand, and clearly not using the product to make profit. Why do these corporations care??????</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; As a 29 year old male no one is confuse me as Britney Spears if I were singing Not yet a woman, and i would bet my life on it, no one, and I mean NO ONE is going to pay me to sing it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While there may be many grey areas in practice which is what we have courts for , why not base these things on the simple logic of..Is the person using the product to make profit ?
( Using a hit song as a soundtrack in a movie ) Is the person representing the product in a way that would damage the companies reputation or business model ?
( selling cheap fake apple computers ) I 'm so confused as to why if someone clearly is n't damaging their brand , and clearly not using the product to make profit .
Why do these corporations care ? ? ? ? ? ?
    As a 29 year old male no one is confuse me as Britney Spears if I were singing Not yet a woman , and i would bet my life on it , no one , and I mean NO ONE is going to pay me to sing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While there may be many grey areas in practice which is what we have courts for, why not base these things on the simple logic of..Is the person using the product to make profit?
(Using a hit song as a soundtrack in a movie)Is the person representing the product in a way that would damage the companies reputation or business model?
(selling cheap fake apple computers)I'm so confused as to why if someone clearly isn't damaging their brand, and clearly not using the product to make profit.
Why do these corporations care??????
    As a 29 year old male no one is confuse me as Britney Spears if I were singing Not yet a woman, and i would bet my life on it, no one, and I mean NO ONE is going to pay me to sing it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833207</id>
	<title>PRS and its quest to take more money</title>
	<author>Hybridmutant</author>
	<datestamp>1256209020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the unfortunate case in the UK. Its a fact that the PRS actively search for people all over the country to impose royalty payments. Our local diner where we collect lunch was only the other day been threatened with a court summon  if don't obtain a royalty license to play their tiny radio in their kitchen. Their argument is that customers can hear it and thus they require a performance license, the true fact is that its so damn quiet that you hardly notice it. But in its true nature, its not about being fair, its simply a money grabbing exercise. Time to write to my MP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the unfortunate case in the UK .
Its a fact that the PRS actively search for people all over the country to impose royalty payments .
Our local diner where we collect lunch was only the other day been threatened with a court summon if do n't obtain a royalty license to play their tiny radio in their kitchen .
Their argument is that customers can hear it and thus they require a performance license , the true fact is that its so damn quiet that you hardly notice it .
But in its true nature , its not about being fair , its simply a money grabbing exercise .
Time to write to my MP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the unfortunate case in the UK.
Its a fact that the PRS actively search for people all over the country to impose royalty payments.
Our local diner where we collect lunch was only the other day been threatened with a court summon  if don't obtain a royalty license to play their tiny radio in their kitchen.
Their argument is that customers can hear it and thus they require a performance license, the true fact is that its so damn quiet that you hardly notice it.
But in its true nature, its not about being fair, its simply a money grabbing exercise.
Time to write to my MP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, but whoever publishes it owes songwriters around the world shitloads of royalties for including words from their songs...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836257</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256231160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A successful song is not "[written] down on a piece of paper and [sent] to somebody" with the expectation of being paid.  A successful song is written, demoed (at the songwriter's expense), and shopped around to various labels and artists.  If it is lucky enough to get picked up, it is then recorded by the artist and packaged for sale and licensing.  The record company then has to market the artist and maybe the song (if they feel like it), which takes a lot of money and is a crapshoot.  If the stars have aligned and the artist gets some traction, and more stars have aligned so that the songwriter's song is one of the artist's more popular tunes, then what has been produced is a product with high value, because it is in high demand.  At that point, everyone wants it.  Kids want it on their iPods, networks want it for their TV shows, and radio stations want to play it until everyone is sick of it.  This makes lots of people a lot of money.</p><p>Who is responsible for this revenue?  Many people, among whom the songwriter is indisputably one of the key players.  Without a PRS (which is made up of songwriters, BTW, not record executives) acting in their interests, none of the songwriters would get paid for their contribution to the measurable financial gain of others.</p><p>I don't know where you got the "I deserve to be paid enough not to have to do anything else" bit.  Nobody *deserves* that, it has to be *earned*.  If I write a crappy song that nobody likes, I'll make nothing from it, and rightfully so.  If I write an amazing song, and it becomes wildly popular, I'll probably make a bundle from it, which is likewise equitable.  It is also unlikely.</p><p>Software developers usually act in a "work-for-hire" capacity, which forfeits any right to royalties.  Lots of musicians work in the same capacity because they are at a competitive disadvantage and lack the negotiating power or prowess to get a cut of future profits.  Software developers, proud bunch that they are, are in the same boat.  All software compaines make royalties in perpetuity off of the software they sell; the developers just don't usually see a cut of that.  They are paid well up-front, so it seems like an equitable arrangement.  Songwriters are paid poorly, if at all, when they enter an agreement with an artist.  It is not an apples-to-apples comparison.</p><p>There definitely need to be boundaries in terms of the enforcement tactics of the PRSs, but to say that songwriting should be compensated like software development belies a complete lack of understanding of the music business (both fundamental operating concepts and the actual realities of how parties interact) and a lack of respect for songwriters (and perhaps career artists) in general.  See: "Fuck off" and the "I wrote some stuff" quote.</p><p>And to wrap it up: your assertion that all of the music created before the first performing rights society popped up (1914, according to Wikipedia) is "arguably better than about 99.99\% of the crap that came out in the last 10 years" is baseless and hyperbolic.  Do you really listen exclusively to Schumann, Bach and Debussy?  Holst?  American spiritual music?  I doubt it.  More likely you have turned yourself off to new music and judge what came out by what you heard on Z100 or on the soundtrack to "The Hills."  It's not the songwriters' fault that you're a lazy listener.  Tons of great stuff comes out every day, you just need to find it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A successful song is not " [ written ] down on a piece of paper and [ sent ] to somebody " with the expectation of being paid .
A successful song is written , demoed ( at the songwriter 's expense ) , and shopped around to various labels and artists .
If it is lucky enough to get picked up , it is then recorded by the artist and packaged for sale and licensing .
The record company then has to market the artist and maybe the song ( if they feel like it ) , which takes a lot of money and is a crapshoot .
If the stars have aligned and the artist gets some traction , and more stars have aligned so that the songwriter 's song is one of the artist 's more popular tunes , then what has been produced is a product with high value , because it is in high demand .
At that point , everyone wants it .
Kids want it on their iPods , networks want it for their TV shows , and radio stations want to play it until everyone is sick of it .
This makes lots of people a lot of money.Who is responsible for this revenue ?
Many people , among whom the songwriter is indisputably one of the key players .
Without a PRS ( which is made up of songwriters , BTW , not record executives ) acting in their interests , none of the songwriters would get paid for their contribution to the measurable financial gain of others.I do n't know where you got the " I deserve to be paid enough not to have to do anything else " bit .
Nobody * deserves * that , it has to be * earned * .
If I write a crappy song that nobody likes , I 'll make nothing from it , and rightfully so .
If I write an amazing song , and it becomes wildly popular , I 'll probably make a bundle from it , which is likewise equitable .
It is also unlikely.Software developers usually act in a " work-for-hire " capacity , which forfeits any right to royalties .
Lots of musicians work in the same capacity because they are at a competitive disadvantage and lack the negotiating power or prowess to get a cut of future profits .
Software developers , proud bunch that they are , are in the same boat .
All software compaines make royalties in perpetuity off of the software they sell ; the developers just do n't usually see a cut of that .
They are paid well up-front , so it seems like an equitable arrangement .
Songwriters are paid poorly , if at all , when they enter an agreement with an artist .
It is not an apples-to-apples comparison.There definitely need to be boundaries in terms of the enforcement tactics of the PRSs , but to say that songwriting should be compensated like software development belies a complete lack of understanding of the music business ( both fundamental operating concepts and the actual realities of how parties interact ) and a lack of respect for songwriters ( and perhaps career artists ) in general .
See : " Fuck off " and the " I wrote some stuff " quote.And to wrap it up : your assertion that all of the music created before the first performing rights society popped up ( 1914 , according to Wikipedia ) is " arguably better than about 99.99 \ % of the crap that came out in the last 10 years " is baseless and hyperbolic .
Do you really listen exclusively to Schumann , Bach and Debussy ?
Holst ? American spiritual music ?
I doubt it .
More likely you have turned yourself off to new music and judge what came out by what you heard on Z100 or on the soundtrack to " The Hills .
" It 's not the songwriters ' fault that you 're a lazy listener .
Tons of great stuff comes out every day , you just need to find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A successful song is not "[written] down on a piece of paper and [sent] to somebody" with the expectation of being paid.
A successful song is written, demoed (at the songwriter's expense), and shopped around to various labels and artists.
If it is lucky enough to get picked up, it is then recorded by the artist and packaged for sale and licensing.
The record company then has to market the artist and maybe the song (if they feel like it), which takes a lot of money and is a crapshoot.
If the stars have aligned and the artist gets some traction, and more stars have aligned so that the songwriter's song is one of the artist's more popular tunes, then what has been produced is a product with high value, because it is in high demand.
At that point, everyone wants it.
Kids want it on their iPods, networks want it for their TV shows, and radio stations want to play it until everyone is sick of it.
This makes lots of people a lot of money.Who is responsible for this revenue?
Many people, among whom the songwriter is indisputably one of the key players.
Without a PRS (which is made up of songwriters, BTW, not record executives) acting in their interests, none of the songwriters would get paid for their contribution to the measurable financial gain of others.I don't know where you got the "I deserve to be paid enough not to have to do anything else" bit.
Nobody *deserves* that, it has to be *earned*.
If I write a crappy song that nobody likes, I'll make nothing from it, and rightfully so.
If I write an amazing song, and it becomes wildly popular, I'll probably make a bundle from it, which is likewise equitable.
It is also unlikely.Software developers usually act in a "work-for-hire" capacity, which forfeits any right to royalties.
Lots of musicians work in the same capacity because they are at a competitive disadvantage and lack the negotiating power or prowess to get a cut of future profits.
Software developers, proud bunch that they are, are in the same boat.
All software compaines make royalties in perpetuity off of the software they sell; the developers just don't usually see a cut of that.
They are paid well up-front, so it seems like an equitable arrangement.
Songwriters are paid poorly, if at all, when they enter an agreement with an artist.
It is not an apples-to-apples comparison.There definitely need to be boundaries in terms of the enforcement tactics of the PRSs, but to say that songwriting should be compensated like software development belies a complete lack of understanding of the music business (both fundamental operating concepts and the actual realities of how parties interact) and a lack of respect for songwriters (and perhaps career artists) in general.
See: "Fuck off" and the "I wrote some stuff" quote.And to wrap it up: your assertion that all of the music created before the first performing rights society popped up (1914, according to Wikipedia) is "arguably better than about 99.99\% of the crap that came out in the last 10 years" is baseless and hyperbolic.
Do you really listen exclusively to Schumann, Bach and Debussy?
Holst?  American spiritual music?
I doubt it.
More likely you have turned yourself off to new music and judge what came out by what you heard on Z100 or on the soundtrack to "The Hills.
"  It's not the songwriters' fault that you're a lazy listener.
Tons of great stuff comes out every day, you just need to find it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836243</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but remember people</title>
	<author>magus\_melchior</author>
	<datestamp>1256231100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfIkMXw\_YM4" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Sergeant?</a> [youtube.com] Is that you?</p><p>Watch out for the pineapple and pointed sticks, guv.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sergeant ?
[ youtube.com ] Is that you ? Watch out for the pineapple and pointed sticks , guv .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sergeant?
[youtube.com] Is that you?Watch out for the pineapple and pointed sticks, guv.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832531</id>
	<title>Cunts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256243100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The cunts should be get to experience the lovely vigilantism the British are so famous for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The cunts should be get to experience the lovely vigilantism the British are so famous for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cunts should be get to experience the lovely vigilantism the British are so famous for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834397</id>
	<title>the altruistic recording industry</title>
	<author>ncmathsadist</author>
	<datestamp>1256221500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oink.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oink.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841191</id>
	<title>They are protecting "starving artists"</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1256212320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know, like Mick Jagger, Elton John, Paul McCartney, Madonna, Celine Dione, &amp; various other impoverished, downtrodden performers.  The nerve of that wealthy, powerful stock clerk.  She got away with it too, which is why the artists' protection organizations like RIAA and MPAA <b>need</b> the right to just kill suspected offenders without the bother of courts and trials.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , like Mick Jagger , Elton John , Paul McCartney , Madonna , Celine Dione , &amp; various other impoverished , downtrodden performers .
The nerve of that wealthy , powerful stock clerk .
She got away with it too , which is why the artists ' protection organizations like RIAA and MPAA need the right to just kill suspected offenders without the bother of courts and trials .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, like Mick Jagger, Elton John, Paul McCartney, Madonna, Celine Dione, &amp; various other impoverished, downtrodden performers.
The nerve of that wealthy, powerful stock clerk.
She got away with it too, which is why the artists' protection organizations like RIAA and MPAA need the right to just kill suspected offenders without the bother of courts and trials.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837065</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1256234520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Welcome to the club friend. I do have to wonder though, what to took you so long? If it took a letter to turn you off from RIAA music, what do you think it will take the average person to do the same? You tell people to ditch the RIAA, but you were willing to support them through years and years of clear obvious abuse. Again I'm not insulting you, I'm glad you came around. But doesn't your own experience prove that it takes a shitload of pushing to make somebody realize they are getting fucked by the industry. I left them when the Napster debacle happened and I never looked back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to the club friend .
I do have to wonder though , what to took you so long ?
If it took a letter to turn you off from RIAA music , what do you think it will take the average person to do the same ?
You tell people to ditch the RIAA , but you were willing to support them through years and years of clear obvious abuse .
Again I 'm not insulting you , I 'm glad you came around .
But does n't your own experience prove that it takes a shitload of pushing to make somebody realize they are getting fucked by the industry .
I left them when the Napster debacle happened and I never looked back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to the club friend.
I do have to wonder though, what to took you so long?
If it took a letter to turn you off from RIAA music, what do you think it will take the average person to do the same?
You tell people to ditch the RIAA, but you were willing to support them through years and years of clear obvious abuse.
Again I'm not insulting you, I'm glad you came around.
But doesn't your own experience prove that it takes a shitload of pushing to make somebody realize they are getting fucked by the industry.
I left them when the Napster debacle happened and I never looked back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835319</id>
	<title>Making political hay</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1256227200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The funny thing is, this story already has its beginning and its end... yet the headline only addresses the beginning.</p><p>What I love about this summary is, it quietly notes that the PRS backed down and apologized, yet then goes on to paint this not as a problem with the PRS trying to abuse copyright, but as a problem with the nature of copyright.</p><p>Yes, copyright balances music (and other creative works) as both art for the common enjoyment and property for commercial gain.  That is specifically what it is and has always been.  That is not what led to this situation.  One organization's greed leading it to <i>over-reach</i> its rights under copyriht is what led to this situation.  Large organizations abuse every area of law to get what they want; it's nothing unqiue to IP law.</p><p>Is copyright as it exists today out of balance?  I think so.  Is this story an example of that imbalance?  Well, since its resolution was correct I guess I'd have to say "no".  But I guess we can't let that stand in the way of a good anti-IP FUD-mongering session.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The funny thing is , this story already has its beginning and its end... yet the headline only addresses the beginning.What I love about this summary is , it quietly notes that the PRS backed down and apologized , yet then goes on to paint this not as a problem with the PRS trying to abuse copyright , but as a problem with the nature of copyright.Yes , copyright balances music ( and other creative works ) as both art for the common enjoyment and property for commercial gain .
That is specifically what it is and has always been .
That is not what led to this situation .
One organization 's greed leading it to over-reach its rights under copyriht is what led to this situation .
Large organizations abuse every area of law to get what they want ; it 's nothing unqiue to IP law.Is copyright as it exists today out of balance ?
I think so .
Is this story an example of that imbalance ?
Well , since its resolution was correct I guess I 'd have to say " no " .
But I guess we ca n't let that stand in the way of a good anti-IP FUD-mongering session .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The funny thing is, this story already has its beginning and its end... yet the headline only addresses the beginning.What I love about this summary is, it quietly notes that the PRS backed down and apologized, yet then goes on to paint this not as a problem with the PRS trying to abuse copyright, but as a problem with the nature of copyright.Yes, copyright balances music (and other creative works) as both art for the common enjoyment and property for commercial gain.
That is specifically what it is and has always been.
That is not what led to this situation.
One organization's greed leading it to over-reach its rights under copyriht is what led to this situation.
Large organizations abuse every area of law to get what they want; it's nothing unqiue to IP law.Is copyright as it exists today out of balance?
I think so.
Is this story an example of that imbalance?
Well, since its resolution was correct I guess I'd have to say "no".
But I guess we can't let that stand in the way of a good anti-IP FUD-mongering session.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1256217540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes. This is completely insane. That is why we all need to stop giving money to these people (I will talk specifically about the RIAA in this post but I am speaking more generally about the big nameless, faceless entertainment cartels worldwide). After I got a nice little letter from the RIAA a few years back, I figured I would heed their warning and stop downloading music illegally (I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either), but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure), and decided that I am going to take my music dollars elsewhere. Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis, I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better! You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins. This is the only way we can fight this shit -- take your money elsewhere. Vote with your wallet. Don't even share this shit online for free -- that gives them a scapegoat. Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves. That is the only way to stop this insanity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
This is completely insane .
That is why we all need to stop giving money to these people ( I will talk specifically about the RIAA in this post but I am speaking more generally about the big nameless , faceless entertainment cartels worldwide ) .
After I got a nice little letter from the RIAA a few years back , I figured I would heed their warning and stop downloading music illegally ( I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm , but I do n't want to get sued either ) , but I also decided that they do n't need any of my money anymore ( I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before , go figure ) , and decided that I am going to take my music dollars elsewhere .
Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis , I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better !
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music , rather than their profit margins .
This is the only way we can fight this shit -- take your money elsewhere .
Vote with your wallet .
Do n't even share this shit online for free -- that gives them a scapegoat .
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves .
That is the only way to stop this insanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
This is completely insane.
That is why we all need to stop giving money to these people (I will talk specifically about the RIAA in this post but I am speaking more generally about the big nameless, faceless entertainment cartels worldwide).
After I got a nice little letter from the RIAA a few years back, I figured I would heed their warning and stop downloading music illegally (I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either), but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure), and decided that I am going to take my music dollars elsewhere.
Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis, I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better!
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins.
This is the only way we can fight this shit -- take your money elsewhere.
Vote with your wallet.
Don't even share this shit online for free -- that gives them a scapegoat.
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves.
That is the only way to stop this insanity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841637</id>
	<title>Re:I'm just waiting for...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256215680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cage's 0'00" would be a better thing to sue for; it is written for "anyone, anytime, anywhere," and the inaugural performance consisted of the composer placing vegetables in a blender and drinking the resultant mixture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cage 's 0'00 " would be a better thing to sue for ; it is written for " anyone , anytime , anywhere , " and the inaugural performance consisted of the composer placing vegetables in a blender and drinking the resultant mixture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cage's 0'00" would be a better thing to sue for; it is written for "anyone, anytime, anywhere," and the inaugural performance consisted of the composer placing vegetables in a blender and drinking the resultant mixture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833017</id>
	<title>Do you hate all dividends, or just royalties?</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1256206980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>To that I can only say one thing: fuck off.</i></p><p>An excellent and persuasive argument. With your silver tongue and compelling logic I suspect you've probably won over many.</p><p><i>That's how it ought to be. You do work, you get paid. Wanna get paid again? Do more work.</i></p><p>So in other words, the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service? Do you hate all kinds of abstract agreements of ownership -- say, over a company or a cooperative -- or is it just copyrights? Do you feel dividends from any kind of entity are also wrong, or is it just music you've singled out?</p><p>I can agree that copyrights have become ridiculously long and the legal hedge around them too thick. But the basic copyright bargain makes as much sense as it did 200 years ago: giving people greater protections for the fruits of their creative labor is one powerful way to give them a greater incentive to invest in it. The fact that this idea has limits and balancing consideration we've tipped past doesn't change its merits.</p><p><i>Which, by the way, is how art used to be compensated.</i></p><p>So, clearly, patronage should be the only way to do it, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To that I can only say one thing : fuck off.An excellent and persuasive argument .
With your silver tongue and compelling logic I suspect you 've probably won over many.That 's how it ought to be .
You do work , you get paid .
Wan na get paid again ?
Do more work.So in other words , the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service ?
Do you hate all kinds of abstract agreements of ownership -- say , over a company or a cooperative -- or is it just copyrights ?
Do you feel dividends from any kind of entity are also wrong , or is it just music you 've singled out ? I can agree that copyrights have become ridiculously long and the legal hedge around them too thick .
But the basic copyright bargain makes as much sense as it did 200 years ago : giving people greater protections for the fruits of their creative labor is one powerful way to give them a greater incentive to invest in it .
The fact that this idea has limits and balancing consideration we 've tipped past does n't change its merits.Which , by the way , is how art used to be compensated.So , clearly , patronage should be the only way to do it , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To that I can only say one thing: fuck off.An excellent and persuasive argument.
With your silver tongue and compelling logic I suspect you've probably won over many.That's how it ought to be.
You do work, you get paid.
Wanna get paid again?
Do more work.So in other words, the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service?
Do you hate all kinds of abstract agreements of ownership -- say, over a company or a cooperative -- or is it just copyrights?
Do you feel dividends from any kind of entity are also wrong, or is it just music you've singled out?I can agree that copyrights have become ridiculously long and the legal hedge around them too thick.
But the basic copyright bargain makes as much sense as it did 200 years ago: giving people greater protections for the fruits of their creative labor is one powerful way to give them a greater incentive to invest in it.
The fact that this idea has limits and balancing consideration we've tipped past doesn't change its merits.Which, by the way, is how art used to be compensated.So, clearly, patronage should be the only way to do it, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833549</id>
	<title>As a PRS member I shall be demanding a sacking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256214120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well as it happens I am a PRS member.</p><p>So I shall be making enquiries about this farce (basically checking the validity of this article) and demanding the sacking of the imbecile(s) responsible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well as it happens I am a PRS member.So I shall be making enquiries about this farce ( basically checking the validity of this article ) and demanding the sacking of the imbecile ( s ) responsible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well as it happens I am a PRS member.So I shall be making enquiries about this farce (basically checking the validity of this article) and demanding the sacking of the imbecile(s) responsible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29839439</id>
	<title>Who are these people?!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256202120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It makes me wonder who the people working for the PRS in the UK and the RIAA and MPAA in the US really are.  Do they have personal lives?  Do they attack anyone they see on the street who is singing a song or watching a movie to get them to prove they have the legal right to sing, listen, or watch copyrighted content?</p><p>It seems like the music/movie police have no personal lives at all, that they just sit around trying to figure out who else they can bully and how they can extort millions of dollars from ordinary citizens.  They must be cold, heartless bastards with no grasp on reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It makes me wonder who the people working for the PRS in the UK and the RIAA and MPAA in the US really are .
Do they have personal lives ?
Do they attack anyone they see on the street who is singing a song or watching a movie to get them to prove they have the legal right to sing , listen , or watch copyrighted content ? It seems like the music/movie police have no personal lives at all , that they just sit around trying to figure out who else they can bully and how they can extort millions of dollars from ordinary citizens .
They must be cold , heartless bastards with no grasp on reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It makes me wonder who the people working for the PRS in the UK and the RIAA and MPAA in the US really are.
Do they have personal lives?
Do they attack anyone they see on the street who is singing a song or watching a movie to get them to prove they have the legal right to sing, listen, or watch copyrighted content?It seems like the music/movie police have no personal lives at all, that they just sit around trying to figure out who else they can bully and how they can extort millions of dollars from ordinary citizens.
They must be cold, heartless bastards with no grasp on reality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835157</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Zordak</author>
	<datestamp>1256226420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed.</p></div><p>Two points.  (1)  Airspace rights have nothing to do with intellectual property, copyright or otherwise.  So bad analogy.  Air space is tied to real property, which is hardly a new concept.  (2)  IP <em>was</em> an issue with the invention of the airplane.  The Wright brothers received <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT821393&amp;id=h5NWAAAAEBAJ&amp;dq=821,393" title="google.com">a patent</a> [google.com] on their "flying machine" and went after infringers aggressively, spawning a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Wright\_brothers\_patent\_war" title="wikipedia.org">patent war</a> [wikipedia.org].  Many people even argued that the Wrights' patent inhibited the growth of the aircraft industry rather than encouraging innovation.  So you see, things aren't that different now.  The Wrights got a patent.  We got an airline industry.  Whether the Wrights would have worked so hard on their machine without the benefit of a patent system, and whether somebody else would have picked up the slack, is left as an exercise for the reader.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed.Two points .
( 1 ) Airspace rights have nothing to do with intellectual property , copyright or otherwise .
So bad analogy .
Air space is tied to real property , which is hardly a new concept .
( 2 ) IP was an issue with the invention of the airplane .
The Wright brothers received a patent [ google.com ] on their " flying machine " and went after infringers aggressively , spawning a patent war [ wikipedia.org ] .
Many people even argued that the Wrights ' patent inhibited the growth of the aircraft industry rather than encouraging innovation .
So you see , things are n't that different now .
The Wrights got a patent .
We got an airline industry .
Whether the Wrights would have worked so hard on their machine without the benefit of a patent system , and whether somebody else would have picked up the slack , is left as an exercise for the reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somehow back in the day the airplane was invented common sense prevailed.Two points.
(1)  Airspace rights have nothing to do with intellectual property, copyright or otherwise.
So bad analogy.
Air space is tied to real property, which is hardly a new concept.
(2)  IP was an issue with the invention of the airplane.
The Wright brothers received a patent [google.com] on their "flying machine" and went after infringers aggressively, spawning a patent war [wikipedia.org].
Many people even argued that the Wrights' patent inhibited the growth of the aircraft industry rather than encouraging innovation.
So you see, things aren't that different now.
The Wrights got a patent.
We got an airline industry.
Whether the Wrights would have worked so hard on their machine without the benefit of a patent system, and whether somebody else would have picked up the slack, is left as an exercise for the reader.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834403</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835623</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256228340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  We need to destroy the music industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
We need to destroy the music industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
We need to destroy the music industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834969</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>liquiddark</author>
	<datestamp>1256225460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More like requiring you to obtain a dictionator's license before you explain the meaning of a word to someone else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More like requiring you to obtain a dictionator 's license before you explain the meaning of a word to someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More like requiring you to obtain a dictionator's license before you explain the meaning of a word to someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833149</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio</p></div></blockquote><p>Damn right. A radio broadcast is free to listen to. As everyone else has already pointed out, the station has paid for the rights to broadcast it to their listeners <b>for free</b>.</p><p>You could hand out portable radios to every customer at the door, and they could all listen to the same thing <b>for free</b>, so why do you have to pay just because you make it a bit more efficient, and play this free broadcast a bit louder?</p><p>I don't know if the problem here is the actual law, or just a bad interpretation of it, but it's ludicrous, and should be stopped.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radioDamn right .
A radio broadcast is free to listen to .
As everyone else has already pointed out , the station has paid for the rights to broadcast it to their listeners for free.You could hand out portable radios to every customer at the door , and they could all listen to the same thing for free , so why do you have to pay just because you make it a bit more efficient , and play this free broadcast a bit louder ? I do n't know if the problem here is the actual law , or just a bad interpretation of it , but it 's ludicrous , and should be stopped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radioDamn right.
A radio broadcast is free to listen to.
As everyone else has already pointed out, the station has paid for the rights to broadcast it to their listeners for free.You could hand out portable radios to every customer at the door, and they could all listen to the same thing for free, so why do you have to pay just because you make it a bit more efficient, and play this free broadcast a bit louder?I don't know if the problem here is the actual law, or just a bad interpretation of it, but it's ludicrous, and should be stopped.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29853583</id>
	<title>Re:the solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256308560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My solution is simple.  I buy lots of CDs and DVDs, but I only buy them used.  No media company gets a single penny of my money.</p><p>Lemongrass</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My solution is simple .
I buy lots of CDs and DVDs , but I only buy them used .
No media company gets a single penny of my money.Lemongrass</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My solution is simple.
I buy lots of CDs and DVDs, but I only buy them used.
No media company gets a single penny of my money.Lemongrass</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>kramerd</author>
	<datestamp>1256241600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back in college, I worked in a restaurant where initially we played the radio in the kitchen for employees during slow hours. At some point, we received a warning letter, so we got rid of the radio, which only employees could hear, and replaced it with a speaker system that played throughout the restaurant. We then changed the policy so that only cds brought in by employees could be played over the speakers. As far as I know (havent worked there in 3 years), they still don't pay anything for doing so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in college , I worked in a restaurant where initially we played the radio in the kitchen for employees during slow hours .
At some point , we received a warning letter , so we got rid of the radio , which only employees could hear , and replaced it with a speaker system that played throughout the restaurant .
We then changed the policy so that only cds brought in by employees could be played over the speakers .
As far as I know ( havent worked there in 3 years ) , they still do n't pay anything for doing so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in college, I worked in a restaurant where initially we played the radio in the kitchen for employees during slow hours.
At some point, we received a warning letter, so we got rid of the radio, which only employees could hear, and replaced it with a speaker system that played throughout the restaurant.
We then changed the policy so that only cds brought in by employees could be played over the speakers.
As far as I know (havent worked there in 3 years), they still don't pay anything for doing so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832607</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Oneiris</author>
	<datestamp>1256244240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a musician too (albeit not a professional one), and I think it ludicrous to expect to be paid in perpetuity for one piece of work created. As many others have replied, music on the radio is already licensed and songwriters/producers/artists are already compensated by their various royalty collection bodies.<br>
<br>
If you're not getting enough money from your work, find another job. As a software engineer, I'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used. Builders aren't paid every time a building they've worked on is sold or let. The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable, and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a musician too ( albeit not a professional one ) , and I think it ludicrous to expect to be paid in perpetuity for one piece of work created .
As many others have replied , music on the radio is already licensed and songwriters/producers/artists are already compensated by their various royalty collection bodies .
If you 're not getting enough money from your work , find another job .
As a software engineer , I 'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used .
Builders are n't paid every time a building they 've worked on is sold or let .
The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable , and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a musician too (albeit not a professional one), and I think it ludicrous to expect to be paid in perpetuity for one piece of work created.
As many others have replied, music on the radio is already licensed and songwriters/producers/artists are already compensated by their various royalty collection bodies.
If you're not getting enough money from your work, find another job.
As a software engineer, I'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used.
Builders aren't paid every time a building they've worked on is sold or let.
The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable, and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256155020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95\% of time totally correct. The other 5\% of the time, its stuff I know about.
<br> <br>
Honestly even smart scientists note just how bad they are at covering anything even remotely technical that they know about. And yet assume every other story in that very paper/web site is 100\% correct.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95 \ % of time totally correct .
The other 5 \ % of the time , its stuff I know about .
Honestly even smart scientists note just how bad they are at covering anything even remotely technical that they know about .
And yet assume every other story in that very paper/web site is 100 \ % correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95\% of time totally correct.
The other 5\% of the time, its stuff I know about.
Honestly even smart scientists note just how bad they are at covering anything even remotely technical that they know about.
And yet assume every other story in that very paper/web site is 100\% correct.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>arkhan\_jg</author>
	<datestamp>1256154540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is, the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station. If it's BBC radio, we've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee, or it's a commercial station with adverts. Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.</p><p>Now that it's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises, it's a 'new' public performance and more money needs to be paid. It's double dipping for the same performance.</p><p>You want to charge stores that play personal CDs through to customers? Fine. But leave my goddamn radio at my desk alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station .
If it 's BBC radio , we 've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee , or it 's a commercial station with adverts .
Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.Now that it 's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises , it 's a 'new ' public performance and more money needs to be paid .
It 's double dipping for the same performance.You want to charge stores that play personal CDs through to customers ?
Fine. But leave my goddamn radio at my desk alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station.
If it's BBC radio, we've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee, or it's a commercial station with adverts.
Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.Now that it's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises, it's a 'new' public performance and more money needs to be paid.
It's double dipping for the same performance.You want to charge stores that play personal CDs through to customers?
Fine. But leave my goddamn radio at my desk alone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837369</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256235900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.</p></div></blockquote><p>Say, that's a great idea!  It would stop those pirates from sharing their rap music with me.</p><p>Get off my lawn!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.Say , that 's a great idea !
It would stop those pirates from sharing their rap music with me.Get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.Say, that's a great idea!
It would stop those pirates from sharing their rap music with me.Get off my lawn!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833783</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>TheReal\_sabret00the</author>
	<datestamp>1256217060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's more likely the case of PRS guy buys dirty magazine. Wife finds dirty magazine. PRS guy is banned from sex for a month. PRS guy decides to take it out on the shop that sold him said dirty magazine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's more likely the case of PRS guy buys dirty magazine .
Wife finds dirty magazine .
PRS guy is banned from sex for a month .
PRS guy decides to take it out on the shop that sold him said dirty magazine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's more likely the case of PRS guy buys dirty magazine.
Wife finds dirty magazine.
PRS guy is banned from sex for a month.
PRS guy decides to take it out on the shop that sold him said dirty magazine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29847919</id>
	<title>No we have NOT!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1256321700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy, but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol.</p></div><p>No, we have NOT! It always takes two sides, for a change in rules to happen. The side who tries to enforce the new rule, and the person accepting it.<br>Which in this case means the criminal / crazy person, trying to enforce a not-from-this-world joke kind of rule, and the total utter retard who is actually buying into that shit.</p><p>Are you telling me, that you are that retard? I don't think so.<br>But then stop talking is that way. You are stronger than that. You can't always cave in, when someone creates a new bullshit rule against you. Or else, what is your life and word worth really?<br>If you let others play with you in that way, you're no better than cattle. Sorry. I don't think you're cattle or a retard. Just please stop acting like one. Even if it's unintended. You are not only hurting yourself with that. You are hurting us all, by empowering that sick new rule. Which means, we have to defend us against you too. And honestly, I don't want to do you any harm.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy , but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol.No , we have NOT !
It always takes two sides , for a change in rules to happen .
The side who tries to enforce the new rule , and the person accepting it.Which in this case means the criminal / crazy person , trying to enforce a not-from-this-world joke kind of rule , and the total utter retard who is actually buying into that shit.Are you telling me , that you are that retard ?
I do n't think so.But then stop talking is that way .
You are stronger than that .
You ca n't always cave in , when someone creates a new bullshit rule against you .
Or else , what is your life and word worth really ? If you let others play with you in that way , you 're no better than cattle .
Sorry. I do n't think you 're cattle or a retard .
Just please stop acting like one .
Even if it 's unintended .
You are not only hurting yourself with that .
You are hurting us all , by empowering that sick new rule .
Which means , we have to defend us against you too .
And honestly , I do n't want to do you any harm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy, but rather a form of private property that must be regulated and taxed like alcohol.No, we have NOT!
It always takes two sides, for a change in rules to happen.
The side who tries to enforce the new rule, and the person accepting it.Which in this case means the criminal / crazy person, trying to enforce a not-from-this-world joke kind of rule, and the total utter retard who is actually buying into that shit.Are you telling me, that you are that retard?
I don't think so.But then stop talking is that way.
You are stronger than that.
You can't always cave in, when someone creates a new bullshit rule against you.
Or else, what is your life and word worth really?If you let others play with you in that way, you're no better than cattle.
Sorry. I don't think you're cattle or a retard.
Just please stop acting like one.
Even if it's unintended.
You are not only hurting yourself with that.
You are hurting us all, by empowering that sick new rule.
Which means, we have to defend us against you too.
And honestly, I don't want to do you any harm.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</id>
	<title>The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.  Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this, and rightfully so: people are using the fruits of their labor (music) to help sell merchandise.  The supermarket is a business, and licensing the music is part of the cost of doing business.  It has been this way for many, many years; we are not entering a new age of PRS thuggery.  Without due diligence on this and other fronts, professional songwriters (who are not, by the by, a particularly wealthy lot) would not have an income.  And please don't make the claim that songwriters get paid for years for 5 minutes of work, because they write far more songs that get rejected or fail commercially than are successful.  It's a job, and not an easy one.</p><p>As for the woman being asked to get a license, yes, that is absurd.  Probably the representative of the PRS who made the request was new and overeager to please his or her boss, or was maybe just a douchebag.  Who knows.  It was a truly boneheaded maneuver.</p><p>Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.  The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner.  Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which makes it a tool of commerce .
Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this , and rightfully so : people are using the fruits of their labor ( music ) to help sell merchandise .
The supermarket is a business , and licensing the music is part of the cost of doing business .
It has been this way for many , many years ; we are not entering a new age of PRS thuggery .
Without due diligence on this and other fronts , professional songwriters ( who are not , by the by , a particularly wealthy lot ) would not have an income .
And please do n't make the claim that songwriters get paid for years for 5 minutes of work , because they write far more songs that get rejected or fail commercially than are successful .
It 's a job , and not an easy one.As for the woman being asked to get a license , yes , that is absurd .
Probably the representative of the PRS who made the request was new and overeager to please his or her boss , or was maybe just a douchebag .
Who knows .
It was a truly boneheaded maneuver.Full disclosure : I 'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS .
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner .
Without someone looking out for my interests , I 'd make nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.
Songwriters are the ones who get compensated for this, and rightfully so: people are using the fruits of their labor (music) to help sell merchandise.
The supermarket is a business, and licensing the music is part of the cost of doing business.
It has been this way for many, many years; we are not entering a new age of PRS thuggery.
Without due diligence on this and other fronts, professional songwriters (who are not, by the by, a particularly wealthy lot) would not have an income.
And please don't make the claim that songwriters get paid for years for 5 minutes of work, because they write far more songs that get rejected or fail commercially than are successful.
It's a job, and not an easy one.As for the woman being asked to get a license, yes, that is absurd.
Probably the representative of the PRS who made the request was new and overeager to please his or her boss, or was maybe just a douchebag.
Who knows.
It was a truly boneheaded maneuver.Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner.
Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832499</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256242260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are testing the waters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are testing the waters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are testing the waters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846123</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>awright69</author>
	<datestamp>1256313180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was going to say "bollocks to that", but I'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols.</p></div><p>Never mind the Sex Pistols - Here's the BOLLOCKS!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to say " bollocks to that " , but I 'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols.Never mind the Sex Pistols - Here 's the BOLLOCKS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to say "bollocks to that", but I'd probably have to pay royalties to the Sex Pistols.Never mind the Sex Pistols - Here's the BOLLOCKS!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833249</id>
	<title>she should pay</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256209860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The artist owns the song, you sing it at anytime athttp://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/09/10/21/2319200/Singer-In-Grocery-Store-Ordered-To-Pay-Royalties?from=rss# home at work in the car you need to pay the artist. you do not own it,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The artist owns the song , you sing it at anytime athttp : //entertainment.slashdot.org/story/09/10/21/2319200/Singer-In-Grocery-Store-Ordered-To-Pay-Royalties ? from = rss # home at work in the car you need to pay the artist .
you do not own it,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The artist owns the song, you sing it at anytime athttp://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/09/10/21/2319200/Singer-In-Grocery-Store-Ordered-To-Pay-Royalties?from=rss# home at work in the car you need to pay the artist.
you do not own it,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1256241780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner. Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.</p></div><p>Let me repeat myself from other posts I've made in the past: the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check. Since this is a tech site, I'll compare this to writing software: just because you wrote some software doesn't mean that you're entitled to receive money. I don't care what the size is of the check is. Software writers are at least ahead of the curve and trying various methods to entice people to pay them directly. What I see from song writers instead is "I wrote some stuff that's used somewhere, pay me forever. And I deserve to be paid enough to not have to do anything else."</p><p>To that I can only say one thing: fuck off. I write a ton of crap. Some of it is good, some of it isn't, but I know it makes a difference. Some of it is specific to the situation and the client, some of it is generic and useful to everyone in the field. I do not expect to get paid in perpetuity for my writing, and I don't expect some third party entity to hunt down documents that kinda look like mine, or people who have something that looks like my document without proof they paid for it.</p><p>That's how it ought to be. You do work, you get paid. Wanna get paid again? Do more work. Which, by the way, is how art used to be compensated. And plenty of awesome work was created through that system - work that is arguably better than about 99.99\% of the crap that came out in the last 10 years, when copyright enforcement truly started to get nuts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner .
Without someone looking out for my interests , I 'd make nothing.Let me repeat myself from other posts I 've made in the past : the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check .
Since this is a tech site , I 'll compare this to writing software : just because you wrote some software does n't mean that you 're entitled to receive money .
I do n't care what the size is of the check is .
Software writers are at least ahead of the curve and trying various methods to entice people to pay them directly .
What I see from song writers instead is " I wrote some stuff that 's used somewhere , pay me forever .
And I deserve to be paid enough to not have to do anything else .
" To that I can only say one thing : fuck off .
I write a ton of crap .
Some of it is good , some of it is n't , but I know it makes a difference .
Some of it is specific to the situation and the client , some of it is generic and useful to everyone in the field .
I do not expect to get paid in perpetuity for my writing , and I do n't expect some third party entity to hunt down documents that kinda look like mine , or people who have something that looks like my document without proof they paid for it.That 's how it ought to be .
You do work , you get paid .
Wan na get paid again ?
Do more work .
Which , by the way , is how art used to be compensated .
And plenty of awesome work was created through that system - work that is arguably better than about 99.99 \ % of the crap that came out in the last 10 years , when copyright enforcement truly started to get nuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner.
Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.Let me repeat myself from other posts I've made in the past: the fact that you write stuff down on a piece of paper and send it to somebody does not entitle you to a check.
Since this is a tech site, I'll compare this to writing software: just because you wrote some software doesn't mean that you're entitled to receive money.
I don't care what the size is of the check is.
Software writers are at least ahead of the curve and trying various methods to entice people to pay them directly.
What I see from song writers instead is "I wrote some stuff that's used somewhere, pay me forever.
And I deserve to be paid enough to not have to do anything else.
"To that I can only say one thing: fuck off.
I write a ton of crap.
Some of it is good, some of it isn't, but I know it makes a difference.
Some of it is specific to the situation and the client, some of it is generic and useful to everyone in the field.
I do not expect to get paid in perpetuity for my writing, and I don't expect some third party entity to hunt down documents that kinda look like mine, or people who have something that looks like my document without proof they paid for it.That's how it ought to be.
You do work, you get paid.
Wanna get paid again?
Do more work.
Which, by the way, is how art used to be compensated.
And plenty of awesome work was created through that system - work that is arguably better than about 99.99\% of the crap that came out in the last 10 years, when copyright enforcement truly started to get nuts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834177</id>
	<title>Re:It's amazing what people accept...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I remember a similar case in the US recently where a stable owner was sent a cease and desist letter. Apparently she played classical music in the stable because it kept the horses calm. I'll dig around and find the post later today.</p><p>How do you like them apples?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I remember a similar case in the US recently where a stable owner was sent a cease and desist letter .
Apparently she played classical music in the stable because it kept the horses calm .
I 'll dig around and find the post later today.How do you like them apples ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I remember a similar case in the US recently where a stable owner was sent a cease and desist letter.
Apparently she played classical music in the stable because it kept the horses calm.
I'll dig around and find the post later today.How do you like them apples?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833633</id>
	<title>Re:New alternative to censorship</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1256215560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Now I wish I had a better spell <b>chequer</b> than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up.</i></p><p>I have to ask - was that intentional?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I wish I had a better spell chequer than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up.I have to ask - was that intentional ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I wish I had a better spell chequer than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up.I have to ask - was that intentional?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833049</id>
	<title>God bless America and all their gangsters!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The british are so f*Cked up! Who do these people think they are? Royalty?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The british are so f * Cked up !
Who do these people think they are ?
Royalty ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The british are so f*Cked up!
Who do these people think they are?
Royalty?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833725</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Peter Simpson</author>
	<datestamp>1256216520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.</p></div><p>Well, at least it would be a tool, if it increased sales.  The studies I found in a brief Google search indicate that both tempo and type of music can affect consumers' purchasing behavior and length of stay.  However, the store was playing a radio, which gave them almost no control over the program material.  A far better choice, if they're interested in using music to increase sales, would be a CD collection or subscription music service.  A radio station, with its constant DJ chatter and advertising spots, isn't going to create much of an environment to enhance sales.</p><p>(and, as others have said, the royalties have already been paid by the station)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which makes it a tool of commerce.Well , at least it would be a tool , if it increased sales .
The studies I found in a brief Google search indicate that both tempo and type of music can affect consumers ' purchasing behavior and length of stay .
However , the store was playing a radio , which gave them almost no control over the program material .
A far better choice , if they 're interested in using music to increase sales , would be a CD collection or subscription music service .
A radio station , with its constant DJ chatter and advertising spots , is n't going to create much of an environment to enhance sales .
( and , as others have said , the royalties have already been paid by the station )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.Well, at least it would be a tool, if it increased sales.
The studies I found in a brief Google search indicate that both tempo and type of music can affect consumers' purchasing behavior and length of stay.
However, the store was playing a radio, which gave them almost no control over the program material.
A far better choice, if they're interested in using music to increase sales, would be a CD collection or subscription music service.
A radio station, with its constant DJ chatter and advertising spots, isn't going to create much of an environment to enhance sales.
(and, as others have said, the royalties have already been paid by the station)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837583</id>
	<title>Re:Batt/Cage</title>
	<author>Phrogman</author>
	<datestamp>1256236680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea that someone could own the copyright to a piece of music that consists entirely of silence, is an excellent example of just how fucking stupid the copyright/IP situation has gotten. The fact that someone could be successfully sued for a 6-figure damage total over such an issue should be a screaming indicator telling people just how stupid this is.</p><p>Its tantamount to my selling an empty paperback novel - all blank pages - and then suing someone because they included whitespace in their book and I am claiming copyright infringement - I can even point to the specific quotes in their work to prove their guilt.</p><p>Now, I can see that there was an association with Cage's original work in that this was a track of silence, and Batt had accredited the work to "Batt/Cage", thus bringing up the association, but how is this not considered to be for comedic purposes, ie fair use? It was a stupid thing to do for the band in retrospect but the idea of copyrighting silence is so extremely ridiculous in the first place, I think its understandable.</p><p>I wonder how far this can go before even the average person on the street is upset enough to revolt and do something? Or have we reached the point where we are all so comfortable as sheep that nothing will get a reaction?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea that someone could own the copyright to a piece of music that consists entirely of silence , is an excellent example of just how fucking stupid the copyright/IP situation has gotten .
The fact that someone could be successfully sued for a 6-figure damage total over such an issue should be a screaming indicator telling people just how stupid this is.Its tantamount to my selling an empty paperback novel - all blank pages - and then suing someone because they included whitespace in their book and I am claiming copyright infringement - I can even point to the specific quotes in their work to prove their guilt.Now , I can see that there was an association with Cage 's original work in that this was a track of silence , and Batt had accredited the work to " Batt/Cage " , thus bringing up the association , but how is this not considered to be for comedic purposes , ie fair use ?
It was a stupid thing to do for the band in retrospect but the idea of copyrighting silence is so extremely ridiculous in the first place , I think its understandable.I wonder how far this can go before even the average person on the street is upset enough to revolt and do something ?
Or have we reached the point where we are all so comfortable as sheep that nothing will get a reaction ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea that someone could own the copyright to a piece of music that consists entirely of silence, is an excellent example of just how fucking stupid the copyright/IP situation has gotten.
The fact that someone could be successfully sued for a 6-figure damage total over such an issue should be a screaming indicator telling people just how stupid this is.Its tantamount to my selling an empty paperback novel - all blank pages - and then suing someone because they included whitespace in their book and I am claiming copyright infringement - I can even point to the specific quotes in their work to prove their guilt.Now, I can see that there was an association with Cage's original work in that this was a track of silence, and Batt had accredited the work to "Batt/Cage", thus bringing up the association, but how is this not considered to be for comedic purposes, ie fair use?
It was a stupid thing to do for the band in retrospect but the idea of copyrighting silence is so extremely ridiculous in the first place, I think its understandable.I wonder how far this can go before even the average person on the street is upset enough to revolt and do something?
Or have we reached the point where we are all so comfortable as sheep that nothing will get a reaction?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836215</id>
	<title>Re:Do you hate all dividends, or just royalties?</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1256230980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, clearly, patronage should be the only way to do it, right?</p></div><p>Red Herring. The current argument advanced by this guy and the various copyright agencies is that copyright is the only way to do it. It patently isn't.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>So in other words, the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service?</p> </div><p>Another Red Herring. There's also fee-for-product. Not to mention that a corporation is not a person, and therefore not part of the discussion on how a person should be compensated for intellectual work.</p><p>As for your dig about cursing, your sarcasm isn't a sign of elevated argumentation either. If you want to throw rocks, make sure it isn't your glass house your throwing them at.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , clearly , patronage should be the only way to do it , right ? Red Herring .
The current argument advanced by this guy and the various copyright agencies is that copyright is the only way to do it .
It patently is n't.So in other words , the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service ?
Another Red Herring .
There 's also fee-for-product .
Not to mention that a corporation is not a person , and therefore not part of the discussion on how a person should be compensated for intellectual work.As for your dig about cursing , your sarcasm is n't a sign of elevated argumentation either .
If you want to throw rocks , make sure it is n't your glass house your throwing them at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, clearly, patronage should be the only way to do it, right?Red Herring.
The current argument advanced by this guy and the various copyright agencies is that copyright is the only way to do it.
It patently isn't.So in other words, the only reasonable model of economic exchange is fee-for-service?
Another Red Herring.
There's also fee-for-product.
Not to mention that a corporation is not a person, and therefore not part of the discussion on how a person should be compensated for intellectual work.As for your dig about cursing, your sarcasm isn't a sign of elevated argumentation either.
If you want to throw rocks, make sure it isn't your glass house your throwing them at.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833497</id>
	<title>Re:I personally welcome the silence!</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1256213280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh I wish I could come home and have a bit of piece and quiet. Unfortunately, the guy upstairs has a very small washing machine which means he uses it virtually every night. Being right above me it shakes the hell out of my ceiling when it spins, and even the noise as it gently turns comes through loudly. I go to a launderette instead and get 2 weeks worth done in just over an hour. He spends money on electricity every day and pisses me off, and has to do some more the next day. Idiot.<br> <br>I'm trying to compose a craigslist entry right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh I wish I could come home and have a bit of piece and quiet .
Unfortunately , the guy upstairs has a very small washing machine which means he uses it virtually every night .
Being right above me it shakes the hell out of my ceiling when it spins , and even the noise as it gently turns comes through loudly .
I go to a launderette instead and get 2 weeks worth done in just over an hour .
He spends money on electricity every day and pisses me off , and has to do some more the next day .
Idiot. I 'm trying to compose a craigslist entry right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh I wish I could come home and have a bit of piece and quiet.
Unfortunately, the guy upstairs has a very small washing machine which means he uses it virtually every night.
Being right above me it shakes the hell out of my ceiling when it spins, and even the noise as it gently turns comes through loudly.
I go to a launderette instead and get 2 weeks worth done in just over an hour.
He spends money on electricity every day and pisses me off, and has to do some more the next day.
Idiot. I'm trying to compose a craigslist entry right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837945</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1256238000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either)</p></div><p>I take it you have no moral objection to stealing CDs from a store because it probably causes them no harm? Hell leave them a $1 and take the CD...as we know CDs and CD cases cost less then $1 - so you are being more then fair.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure),</p></div><p>I hear this a lot, and while I am sure someone, out there, buys 104 to 260 cds per year, I feel confident on calling you out on this.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis,</p></div><p>Nazi's? It's people like you who diminish what happend during the holocaust and WWII</p><p><div class="quote"><p> I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better!</p></div><p>Ah-hah - now we get it. Indie music is better because it is sometimes free? So free makes music sound better. Maybe you are onto something.  Let those artists starve.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins.</p></div><p>Nice of you to make blanket statements about all artists.  Because someone can't possibly enjoy making good music and making a profit.  Better that they spend their time doing it for free - because as we know, free music sounds better then paid music.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves. That is the only way to stop this insanity.</p></div><p>What happend in the article, in the thread you are commenting on, has nothing to do with your rant.  Now run along and go download the latest Mily CD - you know want to put your hands up in the air like yea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm , but I do n't want to get sued either ) I take it you have no moral objection to stealing CDs from a store because it probably causes them no harm ?
Hell leave them a $ 1 and take the CD...as we know CDs and CD cases cost less then $ 1 - so you are being more then fair.but I also decided that they do n't need any of my money anymore ( I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before , go figure ) ,I hear this a lot , and while I am sure someone , out there , buys 104 to 260 cds per year , I feel confident on calling you out on this.Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis,Nazi 's ?
It 's people like you who diminish what happend during the holocaust and WWII I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better ! Ah-hah - now we get it .
Indie music is better because it is sometimes free ?
So free makes music sound better .
Maybe you are onto something .
Let those artists starve .
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music , rather than their profit margins.Nice of you to make blanket statements about all artists .
Because someone ca n't possibly enjoy making good music and making a profit .
Better that they spend their time doing it for free - because as we know , free music sounds better then paid music .
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves .
That is the only way to stop this insanity.What happend in the article , in the thread you are commenting on , has nothing to do with your rant .
Now run along and go download the latest Mily CD - you know want to put your hands up in the air like yea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(I have no moral objection to such activities as they provably cause no harm, but I don't want to get sued either)I take it you have no moral objection to stealing CDs from a store because it probably causes them no harm?
Hell leave them a $1 and take the CD...as we know CDs and CD cases cost less then $1 - so you are being more then fair.but I also decided that they don't need any of my money anymore (I was buying between 2 and 5 CDs EACH WEEK from RIAA musicians before, go figure),I hear this a lot, and while I am sure someone, out there, buys 104 to 260 cds per year, I feel confident on calling you out on this.Not only have I been able to avoid giving money to these Nazis,Nazi's?
It's people like you who diminish what happend during the holocaust and WWII I have discovered that the music being put out by indie labels is infinitely better!Ah-hah - now we get it.
Indie music is better because it is sometimes free?
So free makes music sound better.
Maybe you are onto something.
Let those artists starve.
You get music that is created by artists who care about their music, rather than their profit margins.Nice of you to make blanket statements about all artists.
Because someone can't possibly enjoy making good music and making a profit.
Better that they spend their time doing it for free - because as we know, free music sounds better then paid music.
Dry their profit margins up and make it clear that they have no one to blame but themselves.
That is the only way to stop this insanity.What happend in the article, in the thread you are commenting on, has nothing to do with your rant.
Now run along and go download the latest Mily CD - you know want to put your hands up in the air like yea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833657</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1256215800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can ban commercial use (like with non-commercial CC licenses), and there is demand for commercial use, it makes perfect sense to license your product for commercial situations. I could understand an argument against any restrictions on commercial use, but it wouldn't make sense to me to allow a ban on commercial use while disallowing licensing.<br> <br>

That said, the store should be dealing with getting a license from the radio station- the music company should only be dealing with the radio unless the store uses CDs or something. The music companies could base the radio's license fee on the number of licenses the radio gives out, but there should not be any money going directly from the store to the music companies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can ban commercial use ( like with non-commercial CC licenses ) , and there is demand for commercial use , it makes perfect sense to license your product for commercial situations .
I could understand an argument against any restrictions on commercial use , but it would n't make sense to me to allow a ban on commercial use while disallowing licensing .
That said , the store should be dealing with getting a license from the radio station- the music company should only be dealing with the radio unless the store uses CDs or something .
The music companies could base the radio 's license fee on the number of licenses the radio gives out , but there should not be any money going directly from the store to the music companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can ban commercial use (like with non-commercial CC licenses), and there is demand for commercial use, it makes perfect sense to license your product for commercial situations.
I could understand an argument against any restrictions on commercial use, but it wouldn't make sense to me to allow a ban on commercial use while disallowing licensing.
That said, the store should be dealing with getting a license from the radio station- the music company should only be dealing with the radio unless the store uses CDs or something.
The music companies could base the radio's license fee on the number of licenses the radio gives out, but there should not be any money going directly from the store to the music companies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841847</id>
	<title>Stick it to the man</title>
	<author>Mr. Roadkill</author>
	<datestamp>1256218200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, there's a way out of this. It's called EXCLUSIVELY playing material that's already in the public domain.</p><p>Sure, you won't get Top 40 crap - that's a benefit, by the way - but if you're after appealing background noises for a retail environment you'd be amazed at what's available. One of the best recordings of Rhapsody in Blue I've heard dates from 1927.</p><p>Play these recordings, arrange for somone to "anonymously" call the Music Police to report you, and when the bastards turn up simply ask them to leave the premises as you're not doing anything wrong - without explaining why you're in the right and they're not. Keep logs of what you play, and where you sourced it. Do NOT let any staff play ANYTHING else. Let the Music Police threaten to sue you. Insist that you've done nothing wrong. Let them get their lawyers involved, and let them run up some legal costs, then get the press involved. </p><p>If they're going to play stupid games like threatening action over someone "performing" songs while they're stacking supermarket shelves, they deserve everything they get. I hear there's a lot of stuff from the 40's that's not covered in the UK and Scotland any more, so that covers all the really great swing-era stuff, although I hear Sir Cliff is a little pissed about the fact that he may soon stop getting royalties for Summer Holiday and is trying to pull a Disney...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , there 's a way out of this .
It 's called EXCLUSIVELY playing material that 's already in the public domain.Sure , you wo n't get Top 40 crap - that 's a benefit , by the way - but if you 're after appealing background noises for a retail environment you 'd be amazed at what 's available .
One of the best recordings of Rhapsody in Blue I 've heard dates from 1927.Play these recordings , arrange for somone to " anonymously " call the Music Police to report you , and when the bastards turn up simply ask them to leave the premises as you 're not doing anything wrong - without explaining why you 're in the right and they 're not .
Keep logs of what you play , and where you sourced it .
Do NOT let any staff play ANYTHING else .
Let the Music Police threaten to sue you .
Insist that you 've done nothing wrong .
Let them get their lawyers involved , and let them run up some legal costs , then get the press involved .
If they 're going to play stupid games like threatening action over someone " performing " songs while they 're stacking supermarket shelves , they deserve everything they get .
I hear there 's a lot of stuff from the 40 's that 's not covered in the UK and Scotland any more , so that covers all the really great swing-era stuff , although I hear Sir Cliff is a little pissed about the fact that he may soon stop getting royalties for Summer Holiday and is trying to pull a Disney.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, there's a way out of this.
It's called EXCLUSIVELY playing material that's already in the public domain.Sure, you won't get Top 40 crap - that's a benefit, by the way - but if you're after appealing background noises for a retail environment you'd be amazed at what's available.
One of the best recordings of Rhapsody in Blue I've heard dates from 1927.Play these recordings, arrange for somone to "anonymously" call the Music Police to report you, and when the bastards turn up simply ask them to leave the premises as you're not doing anything wrong - without explaining why you're in the right and they're not.
Keep logs of what you play, and where you sourced it.
Do NOT let any staff play ANYTHING else.
Let the Music Police threaten to sue you.
Insist that you've done nothing wrong.
Let them get their lawyers involved, and let them run up some legal costs, then get the press involved.
If they're going to play stupid games like threatening action over someone "performing" songs while they're stacking supermarket shelves, they deserve everything they get.
I hear there's a lot of stuff from the 40's that's not covered in the UK and Scotland any more, so that covers all the really great swing-era stuff, although I hear Sir Cliff is a little pissed about the fact that he may soon stop getting royalties for Summer Holiday and is trying to pull a Disney...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843255</id>
	<title>Dear PRS</title>
	<author>rninne</author>
	<datestamp>1256239920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear PRS,

Please come and procecute my neighbour for playing his music too loud everynight. It can be heard all the way up and down my street and I'm afraid we are all recieving unlawful preformances of copyrighted music (no matter how tasteless it might be).

~Bleeding-Ears Joe</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear PRS , Please come and procecute my neighbour for playing his music too loud everynight .
It can be heard all the way up and down my street and I 'm afraid we are all recieving unlawful preformances of copyrighted music ( no matter how tasteless it might be ) .
~ Bleeding-Ears Joe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear PRS,

Please come and procecute my neighbour for playing his music too loud everynight.
It can be heard all the way up and down my street and I'm afraid we are all recieving unlawful preformances of copyrighted music (no matter how tasteless it might be).
~Bleeding-Ears Joe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835341</id>
	<title>Industry Assoications better watch it...</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1256227260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its just like the asshole that likes to pick fights at a bar... sooner or later they are going to run into some crazy motherfucker and that will be that. Same could be said for home invasion. It just takes one very angry, slightly nuts guy to take things to the next level.</p><p>I mean it is one thing to ruin grandma's day by suing her into her grave over 6 Frank Sinatra songs, it is entirely another when they ruin some pretty smart, but very crazy survivalist living in a bunker over the new Metallica Album. Suddenly not so fun a past time for some media exec...</p><p>Hey I am I just sayin'!</p><p>Of course survivalist guy probably has all his assets in Guns and Gold, but hey, maybe it was his Grandma!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its just like the asshole that likes to pick fights at a bar... sooner or later they are going to run into some crazy motherfucker and that will be that .
Same could be said for home invasion .
It just takes one very angry , slightly nuts guy to take things to the next level.I mean it is one thing to ruin grandma 's day by suing her into her grave over 6 Frank Sinatra songs , it is entirely another when they ruin some pretty smart , but very crazy survivalist living in a bunker over the new Metallica Album .
Suddenly not so fun a past time for some media exec...Hey I am I just sayin ' ! Of course survivalist guy probably has all his assets in Guns and Gold , but hey , maybe it was his Grandma !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its just like the asshole that likes to pick fights at a bar... sooner or later they are going to run into some crazy motherfucker and that will be that.
Same could be said for home invasion.
It just takes one very angry, slightly nuts guy to take things to the next level.I mean it is one thing to ruin grandma's day by suing her into her grave over 6 Frank Sinatra songs, it is entirely another when they ruin some pretty smart, but very crazy survivalist living in a bunker over the new Metallica Album.
Suddenly not so fun a past time for some media exec...Hey I am I just sayin'!Of course survivalist guy probably has all his assets in Guns and Gold, but hey, maybe it was his Grandma!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832787</id>
	<title>The PRS has already apologised</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256203680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and sent her a bunch of flowers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and sent her a bunch of flowers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and sent her a bunch of flowers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836249</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>SleazyRidr</author>
	<datestamp>1256231100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I stopped buying (mainstream) CDs a few years ago, and I'm 25. I think I'm not old...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I stopped buying ( mainstream ) CDs a few years ago , and I 'm 25 .
I think I 'm not old.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I stopped buying (mainstream) CDs a few years ago, and I'm 25.
I think I'm not old...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834537</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836405</id>
	<title>In related news...</title>
	<author>TaggartAleslayer</author>
	<datestamp>1256231880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In support of Yahoo's Hack Day lap dancing success, Microsoft plans to send Steve Ballmer around the nation to spoon with potential Bing developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In support of Yahoo 's Hack Day lap dancing success , Microsoft plans to send Steve Ballmer around the nation to spoon with potential Bing developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In support of Yahoo's Hack Day lap dancing success, Microsoft plans to send Steve Ballmer around the nation to spoon with potential Bing developers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832649</id>
	<title>Guessing what happened...</title>
	<author>abigsmurf</author>
	<datestamp>1256244840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The PRS sent her a letter saying that she wasn't allowed the radio on in the store front. She sent a letter back saying "I'll just sing instead". PRS took this to mean "I'll sing to the customers" rather than "I'll sing to myself when working".
<br> <br>
I'd be willing to bet she sent an inflammatory letter back to the PRS that helped cause the misunderstanding. In general there's a certain type of people who send these "nanny state gone mad!" stories to tabloids and you never hear the full chain of events.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The PRS sent her a letter saying that she was n't allowed the radio on in the store front .
She sent a letter back saying " I 'll just sing instead " .
PRS took this to mean " I 'll sing to the customers " rather than " I 'll sing to myself when working " .
I 'd be willing to bet she sent an inflammatory letter back to the PRS that helped cause the misunderstanding .
In general there 's a certain type of people who send these " nanny state gone mad !
" stories to tabloids and you never hear the full chain of events .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PRS sent her a letter saying that she wasn't allowed the radio on in the store front.
She sent a letter back saying "I'll just sing instead".
PRS took this to mean "I'll sing to the customers" rather than "I'll sing to myself when working".
I'd be willing to bet she sent an inflammatory letter back to the PRS that helped cause the misunderstanding.
In general there's a certain type of people who send these "nanny state gone mad!
" stories to tabloids and you never hear the full chain of events.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833107</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256207940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane...There's no other words/term for it.</p></div><p>The other word for it is 'copyright'.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally , irrevocably , utterly batshit insane...There 's no other words/term for it.The other word for it is 'copyright' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane...There's no other words/term for it.The other word for it is 'copyright'.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834743</id>
	<title>Stupid</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1256224020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's events like this that I wish we had a regular person (or even better - a panel of regular people) as an observer on copyright cases and had the right to enact the "This is Bullshit" statute.</p><p>Simply put, you take action against a person over a copyrighted work and the panel decides "This is Bullshit", then the copyrighted work in question instantly becomes public domain.</p><p>Sounds a little random for the legal system, but I guarantee such a setup would produce more sensible results that the current system, which goes to show just how screwed up the current system actually is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's events like this that I wish we had a regular person ( or even better - a panel of regular people ) as an observer on copyright cases and had the right to enact the " This is Bullshit " statute.Simply put , you take action against a person over a copyrighted work and the panel decides " This is Bullshit " , then the copyrighted work in question instantly becomes public domain.Sounds a little random for the legal system , but I guarantee such a setup would produce more sensible results that the current system , which goes to show just how screwed up the current system actually is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's events like this that I wish we had a regular person (or even better - a panel of regular people) as an observer on copyright cases and had the right to enact the "This is Bullshit" statute.Simply put, you take action against a person over a copyrighted work and the panel decides "This is Bullshit", then the copyrighted work in question instantly becomes public domain.Sounds a little random for the legal system, but I guarantee such a setup would produce more sensible results that the current system, which goes to show just how screwed up the current system actually is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832803</id>
	<title>Send a message</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1256203860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get Anonymous outside the PRS offices, singing chart hits of the 90's.<br> <br>I recommend the Macarena, all day long...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get Anonymous outside the PRS offices , singing chart hits of the 90 's .
I recommend the Macarena , all day long.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get Anonymous outside the PRS offices, singing chart hits of the 90's.
I recommend the Macarena, all day long...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832635</id>
	<title>Re:Silver lining?</title>
	<author>rts008</author>
	<datestamp>1256244540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Jack Thompson could get in on that, you would have a three ring circus!</p><p>More fun than a barrel of monkeys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Jack Thompson could get in on that , you would have a three ring circus ! More fun than a barrel of monkeys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Jack Thompson could get in on that, you would have a three ring circus!More fun than a barrel of monkeys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832261</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey I was just thinking the same thing !</p><p>Expect to hear from my lawyers very soon...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey I was just thinking the same thing ! Expect to hear from my lawyers very soon.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey I was just thinking the same thing !Expect to hear from my lawyers very soon...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833447</id>
	<title>This was in Viz comic years back</title>
	<author>mooterSkooter</author>
	<datestamp>1256212560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep, life is imitating art here. I remember a silly (fake) article in the Viz comic, that was basically this exact same thing. In the article it stated that Paul McCartney demanded royalties as someone was heard walking down the street whistling Penny Lane or something.</p><p>Brilliant stuff.</p><p>Perhaps PRS need to properly define "Public Performance"? I think it's fair that if someone is making money from performing someones elses music, the original artists should get a cut of it. If, it's a very low-key event making little money I really think it harms society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , life is imitating art here .
I remember a silly ( fake ) article in the Viz comic , that was basically this exact same thing .
In the article it stated that Paul McCartney demanded royalties as someone was heard walking down the street whistling Penny Lane or something.Brilliant stuff.Perhaps PRS need to properly define " Public Performance " ?
I think it 's fair that if someone is making money from performing someones elses music , the original artists should get a cut of it .
If , it 's a very low-key event making little money I really think it harms society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, life is imitating art here.
I remember a silly (fake) article in the Viz comic, that was basically this exact same thing.
In the article it stated that Paul McCartney demanded royalties as someone was heard walking down the street whistling Penny Lane or something.Brilliant stuff.Perhaps PRS need to properly define "Public Performance"?
I think it's fair that if someone is making money from performing someones elses music, the original artists should get a cut of it.
If, it's a very low-key event making little money I really think it harms society.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834057</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>jez9999</author>
	<datestamp>1256219280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS. The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner. Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.</i></p><p>So you think it's worth making people's lives a misery and giving the PRS superpowers in law, to justify your getting enough money a year to buy a nice dinner?  Why don't you stick to your day job?  I'm sorry to say it, but you don't seem to be a good enough songwriter to earn a living that way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Full disclosure : I 'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS .
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner .
Without someone looking out for my interests , I 'd make nothing.So you think it 's worth making people 's lives a misery and giving the PRS superpowers in law , to justify your getting enough money a year to buy a nice dinner ?
Why do n't you stick to your day job ?
I 'm sorry to say it , but you do n't seem to be a good enough songwriter to earn a living that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner.
Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.So you think it's worth making people's lives a misery and giving the PRS superpowers in law, to justify your getting enough money a year to buy a nice dinner?
Why don't you stick to your day job?
I'm sorry to say it, but you don't seem to be a good enough songwriter to earn a living that way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832469</id>
	<title>simple solution</title>
	<author>ILuvRamen</author>
	<datestamp>1256155140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well obviously all she has to do is make up a freestyle rap remix of each song and sing that instead and she might get away with it.  I'd like to see someone at my grocery store bagging groceries while singing a rap or techno/happy hardcore remix of a They Might be Giants song<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well obviously all she has to do is make up a freestyle rap remix of each song and sing that instead and she might get away with it .
I 'd like to see someone at my grocery store bagging groceries while singing a rap or techno/happy hardcore remix of a They Might be Giants song : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well obviously all she has to do is make up a freestyle rap remix of each song and sing that instead and she might get away with it.
I'd like to see someone at my grocery store bagging groceries while singing a rap or techno/happy hardcore remix of a They Might be Giants song :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840273</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution - Make $$$$ from it.</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1256206800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wouldn't matter. PRS (and other countries' equivalents) have written the rules such that you're forced to pay royalties anyway under the assumption that the artist might <i>one day</i> join PRS. And even if musicians could opt-out, the burden would be on the radio station to prove (with documentation) that every single song they play isn't on the PRS's works list. And that it isn't a derivative of one.</p><p>The goals of organizations like PRS are two-fold:</p><p>1. To milk profits from public performances, even those where no revenue is being generated<br>2. To quash the whole idea of independent music regardless of genre, artist, or commercial intent</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would n't matter .
PRS ( and other countries ' equivalents ) have written the rules such that you 're forced to pay royalties anyway under the assumption that the artist might one day join PRS .
And even if musicians could opt-out , the burden would be on the radio station to prove ( with documentation ) that every single song they play is n't on the PRS 's works list .
And that it is n't a derivative of one.The goals of organizations like PRS are two-fold : 1 .
To milk profits from public performances , even those where no revenue is being generated2 .
To quash the whole idea of independent music regardless of genre , artist , or commercial intent</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wouldn't matter.
PRS (and other countries' equivalents) have written the rules such that you're forced to pay royalties anyway under the assumption that the artist might one day join PRS.
And even if musicians could opt-out, the burden would be on the radio station to prove (with documentation) that every single song they play isn't on the PRS's works list.
And that it isn't a derivative of one.The goals of organizations like PRS are two-fold:1.
To milk profits from public performances, even those where no revenue is being generated2.
To quash the whole idea of independent music regardless of genre, artist, or commercial intent</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833605</id>
	<title>Easy Money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256215380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like I need to write a song, get it popular, and charge people to play or sing it.</p><p>Oh wait, I won't get anything will I.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like I need to write a song , get it popular , and charge people to play or sing it.Oh wait , I wo n't get anything will I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like I need to write a song, get it popular, and charge people to play or sing it.Oh wait, I won't get anything will I.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837339</id>
	<title>Re:What did you expect?</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1256235840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I totally agree. Hoever their aim was not to be sane, but to make as many (choose currency) as they can off the backs of their musicans and the public. Insanity is only insane if it doesn't increase profits. The sad thing is in my country (US), we trust the corporations more than our own civic organization, created by real people, not PR departments.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree .
Hoever their aim was not to be sane , but to make as many ( choose currency ) as they can off the backs of their musicans and the public .
Insanity is only insane if it does n't increase profits .
The sad thing is in my country ( US ) , we trust the corporations more than our own civic organization , created by real people , not PR departments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree.
Hoever their aim was not to be sane, but to make as many (choose currency) as they can off the backs of their musicans and the public.
Insanity is only insane if it doesn't increase profits.
The sad thing is in my country (US), we trust the corporations more than our own civic organization, created by real people, not PR departments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837555</id>
	<title>Re:kindle text to speech</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1256236560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with the Kindle is that it can be used to "produce" audio books.  You play the Kindle into a CD recorder and play the CD in your car.  Or, you set up a table on the street and start selling the CDs.</p><p>OK, it isn't the most professional sounding audio book ever made, but it is indeed an audio book.  Would you think that for $2 (vs. maybe $20) would garner some sales?  How about a set of DRM-free MP3 files of a recent, popular book?</p><p>I haven't seen this happening yet, but you better believe this will appear in the marketplace at some point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with the Kindle is that it can be used to " produce " audio books .
You play the Kindle into a CD recorder and play the CD in your car .
Or , you set up a table on the street and start selling the CDs.OK , it is n't the most professional sounding audio book ever made , but it is indeed an audio book .
Would you think that for $ 2 ( vs. maybe $ 20 ) would garner some sales ?
How about a set of DRM-free MP3 files of a recent , popular book ? I have n't seen this happening yet , but you better believe this will appear in the marketplace at some point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with the Kindle is that it can be used to "produce" audio books.
You play the Kindle into a CD recorder and play the CD in your car.
Or, you set up a table on the street and start selling the CDs.OK, it isn't the most professional sounding audio book ever made, but it is indeed an audio book.
Would you think that for $2 (vs. maybe $20) would garner some sales?
How about a set of DRM-free MP3 files of a recent, popular book?I haven't seen this happening yet, but you better believe this will appear in the marketplace at some point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836699</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>bachnit37</author>
	<datestamp>1256233140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anybody check and see if there was ever a greeting card that already said what their apology did?  Did they pay royalties to Hallmark for this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anybody check and see if there was ever a greeting card that already said what their apology did ?
Did they pay royalties to Hallmark for this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anybody check and see if there was ever a greeting card that already said what their apology did?
Did they pay royalties to Hallmark for this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833661</id>
	<title>Royalties for radio broadcast music?  No way!</title>
	<author>Peter Simpson</author>
	<datestamp>1256215800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, they don't play the radio to make a pleasant environment for their customers.  They play the radio to make spending a day waiting on the general public go by a little quicker and to give them something to listen to while they stock shelves or install muffler systems, or whatever else they're doing.</p><p>It's music being broadcast for all to hear.  Why should the supermarket pay royalties and the guy in the car with his windows down not have to?  If they're playing MUZAK or a CD, fine, they should be paying for that music, but paying for broadcast radio doesn't make sense.</p><p>If you're not getting compensated fairly, talk to the radio stations playing your music, don't go after the people listening to it.  It's *broadcast* -- thrown out over the airwaves for whoever wants it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , they do n't play the radio to make a pleasant environment for their customers .
They play the radio to make spending a day waiting on the general public go by a little quicker and to give them something to listen to while they stock shelves or install muffler systems , or whatever else they 're doing.It 's music being broadcast for all to hear .
Why should the supermarket pay royalties and the guy in the car with his windows down not have to ?
If they 're playing MUZAK or a CD , fine , they should be paying for that music , but paying for broadcast radio does n't make sense.If you 're not getting compensated fairly , talk to the radio stations playing your music , do n't go after the people listening to it .
It 's * broadcast * -- thrown out over the airwaves for whoever wants it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, they don't play the radio to make a pleasant environment for their customers.
They play the radio to make spending a day waiting on the general public go by a little quicker and to give them something to listen to while they stock shelves or install muffler systems, or whatever else they're doing.It's music being broadcast for all to hear.
Why should the supermarket pay royalties and the guy in the car with his windows down not have to?
If they're playing MUZAK or a CD, fine, they should be paying for that music, but paying for broadcast radio doesn't make sense.If you're not getting compensated fairly, talk to the radio stations playing your music, don't go after the people listening to it.
It's *broadcast* -- thrown out over the airwaves for whoever wants it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833615</id>
	<title>What really gives me the creeps.</title>
	<author>yogibaer</author>
	<datestamp>1256215440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How in the known universe did they find out that somebody is singing in a shop in Scotland? Big Brother is watching you...</htmltext>
<tokenext>How in the known universe did they find out that somebody is singing in a shop in Scotland ?
Big Brother is watching you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How in the known universe did they find out that somebody is singing in a shop in Scotland?
Big Brother is watching you...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832371</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Andorin</author>
	<datestamp>1256153580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS. The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner. Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.</p></div><p>So you'll tolerate the existence of these bloodsucking organizations in exchange for a few (and I mean a few) bucks for yourself?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Full disclosure : I 'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS .
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner .
Without someone looking out for my interests , I 'd make nothing.So you 'll tolerate the existence of these bloodsucking organizations in exchange for a few ( and I mean a few ) bucks for yourself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Full disclosure: I'm a songwriter and a member of a PRS.
The money I make a year on songwriting could maybe buy a nice dinner.
Without someone looking out for my interests, I'd make nothing.So you'll tolerate the existence of these bloodsucking organizations in exchange for a few (and I mean a few) bucks for yourself?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832837</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>GreatBunzinni</author>
	<datestamp>1256204280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Was this before or after the public backlash against such a damaging PR fuckup? This is the difference between "they may be, after all, a decent, level-headed group" and "those evil-doers are desperate to minimize the shitstorm they cast their way due to their arrogance and greed".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was this before or after the public backlash against such a damaging PR fuckup ?
This is the difference between " they may be , after all , a decent , level-headed group " and " those evil-doers are desperate to minimize the shitstorm they cast their way due to their arrogance and greed " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was this before or after the public backlash against such a damaging PR fuckup?
This is the difference between "they may be, after all, a decent, level-headed group" and "those evil-doers are desperate to minimize the shitstorm they cast their way due to their arrogance and greed".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833685</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I buy  you a nice dinner, will you quit the PRS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I buy you a nice dinner , will you quit the PRS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I buy  you a nice dinner, will you quit the PRS?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832225</id>
	<title>What the......</title>
	<author>socceroos</author>
	<datestamp>1256151540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bastards.
<br> <br>
Come on, it has to be said - this capitalism is getting out of hand. People are getting stupid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bastards .
Come on , it has to be said - this capitalism is getting out of hand .
People are getting stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bastards.
Come on, it has to be said - this capitalism is getting out of hand.
People are getting stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842761</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Cur8or</author>
	<datestamp>1256231160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Buying a dictionary might become quite expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Buying a dictionary might become quite expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Buying a dictionary might become quite expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832985</id>
	<title>More PRS idiocy</title>
	<author>dcarmi</author>
	<datestamp>1256206560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I recall two other stories relating to the PRS.<p>

One chap was phoned by the PRS and was found to be listening to music at work. He informed them he composed the piece and was the sole artist. This cut no ice, with the PRS. (I suppose he might possibly listen to illegal music, so he should be presumed guilty!)</p><p>

Another incident (2008) relates to the sole owner and lone worker in a garage in Nottingham being told he had to pay &pound;150 to listen to the radio. see <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7671215.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7671215.stm</a> [bbc.co.uk] </p><p>

Even if I listen to my MP3 player through headphones, my company is liable to pay for a licence!  Perhaps I'd have to join the smokers outside for my quick fix of some illicit Pink Floyd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall two other stories relating to the PRS .
One chap was phoned by the PRS and was found to be listening to music at work .
He informed them he composed the piece and was the sole artist .
This cut no ice , with the PRS .
( I suppose he might possibly listen to illegal music , so he should be presumed guilty !
) Another incident ( 2008 ) relates to the sole owner and lone worker in a garage in Nottingham being told he had to pay   150 to listen to the radio .
see http : //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7671215.stm [ bbc.co.uk ] Even if I listen to my MP3 player through headphones , my company is liable to pay for a licence !
Perhaps I 'd have to join the smokers outside for my quick fix of some illicit Pink Floyd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall two other stories relating to the PRS.
One chap was phoned by the PRS and was found to be listening to music at work.
He informed them he composed the piece and was the sole artist.
This cut no ice, with the PRS.
(I suppose he might possibly listen to illegal music, so he should be presumed guilty!
)

Another incident (2008) relates to the sole owner and lone worker in a garage in Nottingham being told he had to pay £150 to listen to the radio.
see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7671215.stm [bbc.co.uk] 

Even if I listen to my MP3 player through headphones, my company is liable to pay for a licence!
Perhaps I'd have to join the smokers outside for my quick fix of some illicit Pink Floyd.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832541</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Estragib</author>
	<datestamp>1256243220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One would think the PRS were quick to demand a retraction then, especially considering the UK's oft-cited harsh libel laws, wouldn't one?</htmltext>
<tokenext>One would think the PRS were quick to demand a retraction then , especially considering the UK 's oft-cited harsh libel laws , would n't one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One would think the PRS were quick to demand a retraction then, especially considering the UK's oft-cited harsh libel laws, wouldn't one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832293</id>
	<title>Pay Royalties Society</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A pround member of the MAFIAA family I suppose...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A pround member of the MAFIAA family I suppose.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A pround member of the MAFIAA family I suppose...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833535</id>
	<title>Put The Shoe On The Other Foot!</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1256214000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was thinking of charging rent in my head for making me listen to it. If someone's radio/TV/singing is within earshot I lose my right to be free of their influence on my senses. I started thinking about that 10 years ago when the radio ads started playing Bachelor(unRealityTV) promos, followed by the morning shows blathering on about last week's Survivor. I am proud to say, I have watched 10 minutes of Survivor and 1 episode of Big Brother in my life, and I want those 70 minutes back!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking of charging rent in my head for making me listen to it .
If someone 's radio/TV/singing is within earshot I lose my right to be free of their influence on my senses .
I started thinking about that 10 years ago when the radio ads started playing Bachelor ( unRealityTV ) promos , followed by the morning shows blathering on about last week 's Survivor .
I am proud to say , I have watched 10 minutes of Survivor and 1 episode of Big Brother in my life , and I want those 70 minutes back !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking of charging rent in my head for making me listen to it.
If someone's radio/TV/singing is within earshot I lose my right to be free of their influence on my senses.
I started thinking about that 10 years ago when the radio ads started playing Bachelor(unRealityTV) promos, followed by the morning shows blathering on about last week's Survivor.
I am proud to say, I have watched 10 minutes of Survivor and 1 episode of Big Brother in my life, and I want those 70 minutes back!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836277</id>
	<title>Nantucket</title>
	<author>thinairart</author>
	<datestamp>1256231220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone know the going royalty rate for "There once was a man from Nantucket..." ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone know the going royalty rate for " There once was a man from Nantucket... " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone know the going royalty rate for "There once was a man from Nantucket..." ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837255</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>JohhnyTHM</author>
	<datestamp>1256235420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A few weeks ago I worked from home, and had the radio on.  Now the PRS says that while this makes my a home a place of work, and I should be paying a performance fee to them, as I was working alone they don't normally apply the rules (tho they could).<br> <br>
Now a few hours later my girlfriend gets home from work and joins me in our computer room.  The radio I am listening to is now a public performance, as 2 people can hear it in a place of work.  I owe the PRS money as I am the house owner, allowing the public (me and my girlfriend) to listen to music, (that has already been payed for by our liscense fee and the radio station) in a place of work (my house).<br> <br>
I hope more of these stories hit the news so that people can see just how greedy these people are being, and why some local pubs are having to stop having live music as they just cant afford it any more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A few weeks ago I worked from home , and had the radio on .
Now the PRS says that while this makes my a home a place of work , and I should be paying a performance fee to them , as I was working alone they do n't normally apply the rules ( tho they could ) .
Now a few hours later my girlfriend gets home from work and joins me in our computer room .
The radio I am listening to is now a public performance , as 2 people can hear it in a place of work .
I owe the PRS money as I am the house owner , allowing the public ( me and my girlfriend ) to listen to music , ( that has already been payed for by our liscense fee and the radio station ) in a place of work ( my house ) .
I hope more of these stories hit the news so that people can see just how greedy these people are being , and why some local pubs are having to stop having live music as they just cant afford it any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few weeks ago I worked from home, and had the radio on.
Now the PRS says that while this makes my a home a place of work, and I should be paying a performance fee to them, as I was working alone they don't normally apply the rules (tho they could).
Now a few hours later my girlfriend gets home from work and joins me in our computer room.
The radio I am listening to is now a public performance, as 2 people can hear it in a place of work.
I owe the PRS money as I am the house owner, allowing the public (me and my girlfriend) to listen to music, (that has already been payed for by our liscense fee and the radio station) in a place of work (my house).
I hope more of these stories hit the news so that people can see just how greedy these people are being, and why some local pubs are having to stop having live music as they just cant afford it any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832565</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256243640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The village store where Mrs Burt works was contacted by the PRS earlier this year to warn them that a licence was needed to play a radio within earshot of customers.</p></div><p>How were they contacted? PRS should have a record of this, and likely a record of any subsequent contact.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The village store where Mrs Burt works was contacted by the PRS earlier this year to warn them that a licence was needed to play a radio within earshot of customers.How were they contacted ?
PRS should have a record of this , and likely a record of any subsequent contact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The village store where Mrs Burt works was contacted by the PRS earlier this year to warn them that a licence was needed to play a radio within earshot of customers.How were they contacted?
PRS should have a record of this, and likely a record of any subsequent contact.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</id>
	<title>Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>rekenner</author>
	<datestamp>1256151540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's what this is. <br>
The idea that fining someone for singing to themself while they work. The idea that this could be in any way the right course of action. <br>
There's no other words/term for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what this is .
The idea that fining someone for singing to themself while they work .
The idea that this could be in any way the right course of action .
There 's no other words/term for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what this is.
The idea that fining someone for singing to themself while they work.
The idea that this could be in any way the right course of action.
There's no other words/term for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837279</id>
	<title>money == free speech</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256235540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Money is a form of free speech. Those with more money have more free speech. Two legs bad. Four legs good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Money is a form of free speech .
Those with more money have more free speech .
Two legs bad .
Four legs good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Money is a form of free speech.
Those with more money have more free speech.
Two legs bad.
Four legs good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832923</id>
	<title>Re:New alternative to censorship</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256205480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used to live in Clackmannanshire - it's an area of Scotland that encompasses several small towns and villages. A bit of digging and I find that the town this store is in is: Clackmannan.

<p>Now I wish I had a better spell chequer than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up. (Dyslexia hadn't been invented back then) Trying to write Clackmannanshire as part of my address was bothersome!

</p><p>Other local towns include Sauchie (Pronounced Sawki) Tullibody and Tillicoultry. The local big hill is Dumyat (Dum eye at)

</p><p>I want my cheaper words!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to live in Clackmannanshire - it 's an area of Scotland that encompasses several small towns and villages .
A bit of digging and I find that the town this store is in is : Clackmannan .
Now I wish I had a better spell chequer than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up .
( Dyslexia had n't been invented back then ) Trying to write Clackmannanshire as part of my address was bothersome !
Other local towns include Sauchie ( Pronounced Sawki ) Tullibody and Tillicoultry .
The local big hill is Dumyat ( Dum eye at ) I want my cheaper words ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to live in Clackmannanshire - it's an area of Scotland that encompasses several small towns and villages.
A bit of digging and I find that the town this store is in is: Clackmannan.
Now I wish I had a better spell chequer than a teacher shouting at me when I was growing up.
(Dyslexia hadn't been invented back then) Trying to write Clackmannanshire as part of my address was bothersome!
Other local towns include Sauchie (Pronounced Sawki) Tullibody and Tillicoultry.
The local big hill is Dumyat (Dum eye at)

I want my cheaper words!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651</id>
	<title>New alternative to censorship</title>
	<author>tinkerton</author>
	<datestamp>1256244840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and your spell checker gets a module that suggests cheaper words to use in your sentences. And it takes in account the extra tax on words the government doesn't like. You can still write what you want but some things are really costly..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and your spell checker gets a module that suggests cheaper words to use in your sentences .
And it takes in account the extra tax on words the government does n't like .
You can still write what you want but some things are really costly. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and your spell checker gets a module that suggests cheaper words to use in your sentences.
And it takes in account the extra tax on words the government doesn't like.
You can still write what you want but some things are really costly..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833211</id>
	<title>PRS needs to be shutdown then</title>
	<author>PhreezeVi</author>
	<datestamp>1256209200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this is what they are spending their time doing - and more importantly that they feel this is acceptable - then they no longer serve any contributory, useful purpose and must be shut down. In fact all such organizations should be shut down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is what they are spending their time doing - and more importantly that they feel this is acceptable - then they no longer serve any contributory , useful purpose and must be shut down .
In fact all such organizations should be shut down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is what they are spending their time doing - and more importantly that they feel this is acceptable - then they no longer serve any contributory, useful purpose and must be shut down.
In fact all such organizations should be shut down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832779</id>
	<title>Re:I'm just waiting for...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256203620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mod parent up, he's a comedy genius.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up , he 's a comedy genius .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up, he's a comedy genius.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837607</id>
	<title>Re:It's amazing what people accept...</title>
	<author>WiiVault</author>
	<datestamp>1256236800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you are onto something. The OP forgets that the PRS is not in it for him/her, but instead for themselves. They care as much about art as the average art thief.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you are onto something .
The OP forgets that the PRS is not in it for him/her , but instead for themselves .
They care as much about art as the average art thief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you are onto something.
The OP forgets that the PRS is not in it for him/her, but instead for themselves.
They care as much about art as the average art thief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833487</id>
	<title>Well, opinions *are* like assholes</title>
	<author>SlippyToad</author>
	<datestamp>1256213100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some stink more than others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some stink more than others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some stink more than others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836565</id>
	<title>This Agency is Overboard</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1256232540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the most ridiculous agency since the RIAA I've heard of. To physically harness sounds, to accost people singing. I know the good people of England haven't a clue how to legally end the PRS. The very best thing to do is quit buying music. Quit supporting artists utilizing the industry until the industry dies (as is inevitable)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The upside to the dying industry is; all musical artists will have a level playing field to earn a performance living on, music of all sorts will flourish and you won't be tied down to only bands that the industry selects as cooperative with their profits to listen to. Musicians will make money and possibly a living for a change. Music will be free. Performance will be paid.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The downside to the death of the industry is; it hasn't happened yet and mankind faces the silly gyrations and convulsions of an outdated business model.<br>All employed by the industry will have to find actual work, beneficial to society instead of enslaving sound and vampiring the talented (who are the last and least to be paid by the industries corrupt system).<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Acquire music  as you will. Pay no one but the artist directly, avoiding middlemen as the enemy of mankind and liberty.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Just let it die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the most ridiculous agency since the RIAA I 've heard of .
To physically harness sounds , to accost people singing .
I know the good people of England have n't a clue how to legally end the PRS .
The very best thing to do is quit buying music .
Quit supporting artists utilizing the industry until the industry dies ( as is inevitable )           The upside to the dying industry is ; all musical artists will have a level playing field to earn a performance living on , music of all sorts will flourish and you wo n't be tied down to only bands that the industry selects as cooperative with their profits to listen to .
Musicians will make money and possibly a living for a change .
Music will be free .
Performance will be paid .
          The downside to the death of the industry is ; it has n't happened yet and mankind faces the silly gyrations and convulsions of an outdated business model.All employed by the industry will have to find actual work , beneficial to society instead of enslaving sound and vampiring the talented ( who are the last and least to be paid by the industries corrupt system ) .
              Acquire music as you will .
Pay no one but the artist directly , avoiding middlemen as the enemy of mankind and liberty .
          Just let it die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the most ridiculous agency since the RIAA I've heard of.
To physically harness sounds, to accost people singing.
I know the good people of England haven't a clue how to legally end the PRS.
The very best thing to do is quit buying music.
Quit supporting artists utilizing the industry until the industry dies (as is inevitable)
          The upside to the dying industry is; all musical artists will have a level playing field to earn a performance living on, music of all sorts will flourish and you won't be tied down to only bands that the industry selects as cooperative with their profits to listen to.
Musicians will make money and possibly a living for a change.
Music will be free.
Performance will be paid.
          The downside to the death of the industry is; it hasn't happened yet and mankind faces the silly gyrations and convulsions of an outdated business model.All employed by the industry will have to find actual work, beneficial to society instead of enslaving sound and vampiring the talented (who are the last and least to be paid by the industries corrupt system).
              Acquire music  as you will.
Pay no one but the artist directly, avoiding middlemen as the enemy of mankind and liberty.
          Just let it die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836479</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256232240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck yeah they should be paid!</p><p>I've built many buildings.  I want a chunk of cash every year until i'm dead...</p><p>No wait..  I want a chunk of cash every year after i'm dead too!  Fuck those thieves!  They're stealing my hard work by making money in a building *i* helped build!!!  HOW DARE THEY!</p><p>Where is this PRS headquarters building.  We got get paid on behalf of the people who built their building too!  And on behalf of the people who created the materials the buildings are made of!  And on behalf of the people who refined the raw materials those materials were made from!  And on behalf of the people who made the buildings where all these materials were made!   MY GOD!  ITS A NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF STEALING!</p><p>WE GOT TO GET PAID!!!!</p><p>(if i listen to the insanity long enough,  it starts to sound sane.  in a really stupid way.  Mostly because i want some free money.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck yeah they should be paid ! I 've built many buildings .
I want a chunk of cash every year until i 'm dead...No wait.. I want a chunk of cash every year after i 'm dead too !
Fuck those thieves !
They 're stealing my hard work by making money in a building * i * helped build ! ! !
HOW DARE THEY ! Where is this PRS headquarters building .
We got get paid on behalf of the people who built their building too !
And on behalf of the people who created the materials the buildings are made of !
And on behalf of the people who refined the raw materials those materials were made from !
And on behalf of the people who made the buildings where all these materials were made !
MY GOD !
ITS A NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF STEALING ! WE GOT TO GET PAID ! ! ! !
( if i listen to the insanity long enough , it starts to sound sane .
in a really stupid way .
Mostly because i want some free money .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck yeah they should be paid!I've built many buildings.
I want a chunk of cash every year until i'm dead...No wait..  I want a chunk of cash every year after i'm dead too!
Fuck those thieves!
They're stealing my hard work by making money in a building *i* helped build!!!
HOW DARE THEY!Where is this PRS headquarters building.
We got get paid on behalf of the people who built their building too!
And on behalf of the people who created the materials the buildings are made of!
And on behalf of the people who refined the raw materials those materials were made from!
And on behalf of the people who made the buildings where all these materials were made!
MY GOD!
ITS A NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF STEALING!WE GOT TO GET PAID!!!!
(if i listen to the insanity long enough,  it starts to sound sane.
in a really stupid way.
Mostly because i want some free money.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29844489</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256302800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look. I don't want to argue with you, its just how The Law works in the UK (where the shop is).</p><p>Here's a link to lots of questions and answers.</p><p><a href="http://www.prsformusic.com/users/businessesandliveevents/musicforbusinesses/Pages/havewecontacted.aspx" title="prsformusic.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.prsformusic.com/users/businessesandliveevents/musicforbusinesses/Pages/havewecontacted.aspx</a> [prsformusic.com]</p><p>That's the terms under which music can be played in a business. That's just reality. Get used to it.</p><p>If they don't want to pay for a license then they are free to do that but then they can't play music.</p><p>If I don't like the price they are charging for apples at their shop then I don't buy apples. Simple as.</p><p>If I took the apples anyway I would be a twat.</p><p>If someone want to listen to an iPod on headphones they can do that because it's not a public performance (ie. no-one else can hear it).</p><p>I'm not saying that any of this shit is sensible or "right" but it's just the way it is OK. I personally think that the law telling me that I can't smoke ganja is stupid but that is not a defence when I get busted now, is it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look .
I do n't want to argue with you , its just how The Law works in the UK ( where the shop is ) .Here 's a link to lots of questions and answers.http : //www.prsformusic.com/users/businessesandliveevents/musicforbusinesses/Pages/havewecontacted.aspx [ prsformusic.com ] That 's the terms under which music can be played in a business .
That 's just reality .
Get used to it.If they do n't want to pay for a license then they are free to do that but then they ca n't play music.If I do n't like the price they are charging for apples at their shop then I do n't buy apples .
Simple as.If I took the apples anyway I would be a twat.If someone want to listen to an iPod on headphones they can do that because it 's not a public performance ( ie .
no-one else can hear it ) .I 'm not saying that any of this shit is sensible or " right " but it 's just the way it is OK. I personally think that the law telling me that I ca n't smoke ganja is stupid but that is not a defence when I get busted now , is it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look.
I don't want to argue with you, its just how The Law works in the UK (where the shop is).Here's a link to lots of questions and answers.http://www.prsformusic.com/users/businessesandliveevents/musicforbusinesses/Pages/havewecontacted.aspx [prsformusic.com]That's the terms under which music can be played in a business.
That's just reality.
Get used to it.If they don't want to pay for a license then they are free to do that but then they can't play music.If I don't like the price they are charging for apples at their shop then I don't buy apples.
Simple as.If I took the apples anyway I would be a twat.If someone want to listen to an iPod on headphones they can do that because it's not a public performance (ie.
no-one else can hear it).I'm not saying that any of this shit is sensible or "right" but it's just the way it is OK. I personally think that the law telling me that I can't smoke ganja is stupid but that is not a defence when I get busted now, is it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837431</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Knara</author>
	<datestamp>1256236080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a software engineer, I'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used.</p></div><p>So it's copyright holders' fault that the majority of your income is the result of Works for Hire?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Builders aren't paid every time a building they've worked on is sold or let.</p></div><p>Also a work for hire.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable, and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact.</p></div><p>Its perfectly sustainable, so long as people are willing to pay for what they utilize.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a software engineer , I 'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used.So it 's copyright holders ' fault that the majority of your income is the result of Works for Hire ? Builders are n't paid every time a building they 've worked on is sold or let.Also a work for hire.The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable , and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact.Its perfectly sustainable , so long as people are willing to pay for what they utilize .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a software engineer, I'm not paid every time code I wrote 2 years ago is used.So it's copyright holders' fault that the majority of your income is the result of Works for Hire?Builders aren't paid every time a building they've worked on is sold or let.Also a work for hire.The current practice of rewarding artists every time their music is played is unsustainable, and more and more people are becoming aware of this fact.Its perfectly sustainable, so long as people are willing to pay for what they utilize.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832607</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29839021</id>
	<title>Karaoke Flash Mob</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1256243220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone needs to start a Karaoke Flash mob in front of those laws offices to teach the UK idiots a lesson in humility.</p><p>Of course because of the UK big brother cams everyone who participated in it would be tracked down and jailed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone needs to start a Karaoke Flash mob in front of those laws offices to teach the UK idiots a lesson in humility.Of course because of the UK big brother cams everyone who participated in it would be tracked down and jailed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone needs to start a Karaoke Flash mob in front of those laws offices to teach the UK idiots a lesson in humility.Of course because of the UK big brother cams everyone who participated in it would be tracked down and jailed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834187</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>ffreeloader</author>
	<datestamp>1256219880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The thing is, the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station. If it's BBC radio, we've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee, or it's a commercial station with adverts. Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.</p><p>Now that it's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises, it's a 'new' public performance and more money needs to be paid. It's double dipping for the same performance.</p></div><p>Exactly.  This is no different than a farmer selling his produce to a grocery store, and then charging the store's customers who buy his produce for eating it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station .
If it 's BBC radio , we 've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee , or it 's a commercial station with adverts .
Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.Now that it 's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises , it 's a 'new ' public performance and more money needs to be paid .
It 's double dipping for the same performance.Exactly .
This is no different than a farmer selling his produce to a grocery store , and then charging the store 's customers who buy his produce for eating it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, the songwriters have already been paid - by the radio station.
If it's BBC radio, we've already paid for that music out of our annual licence fee, or it's a commercial station with adverts.
Every person in that store has the right to listen to that station already as the broadcast fees have already been paid.Now that it's suddenly being able to be listened to while on a store premises, it's a 'new' public performance and more money needs to be paid.
It's double dipping for the same performance.Exactly.
This is no different than a farmer selling his produce to a grocery store, and then charging the store's customers who buy his produce for eating it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834897</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1256225100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Software patents, specially the common sense ones, are potentially worse (specially if tried to be enforced). Freedom to sing (an existing, copyrighted song, etc, etc) is one thing, but freedom to think is something that not even some totalitarian regimes tried to enforce.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Software patents , specially the common sense ones , are potentially worse ( specially if tried to be enforced ) .
Freedom to sing ( an existing , copyrighted song , etc , etc ) is one thing , but freedom to think is something that not even some totalitarian regimes tried to enforce .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software patents, specially the common sense ones, are potentially worse (specially if tried to be enforced).
Freedom to sing (an existing, copyrighted song, etc, etc) is one thing, but freedom to think is something that not even some totalitarian regimes tried to enforce.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832503</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256242380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We're very sorry we made a big mistake.   We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck.</p></div><p>
Which is lawyer-speak for "Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure, and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're very sorry we made a big mistake .
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck .
Which is lawyer-speak for " Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure , and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're very sorry we made a big mistake.
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck.
Which is lawyer-speak for "Our next target will be someone with a lot less public exposure, and much less ability to defend against our accusations in court.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833519</id>
	<title>Staggering.</title>
	<author>MrNemesis</author>
	<datestamp>1256213580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...are the PRS claiming ownership of children that were conceived during a playback of Barry White's greatest hits? Would they like a cut of the combined wages of a man and his wife who met at a concert? How long until certain sea-mammals are hunted down and killed due to flagrant public performances of the legendary Whale Song Anthems 7?</p><p>I have no idea how much coke it must have taken for these people to get such an overblown sense of their own importance, but I'm hoping they carry on. Behaviour like this reminds me of the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...are the PRS claiming ownership of children that were conceived during a playback of Barry White 's greatest hits ?
Would they like a cut of the combined wages of a man and his wife who met at a concert ?
How long until certain sea-mammals are hunted down and killed due to flagrant public performances of the legendary Whale Song Anthems 7 ? I have no idea how much coke it must have taken for these people to get such an overblown sense of their own importance , but I 'm hoping they carry on .
Behaviour like this reminds me of the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...are the PRS claiming ownership of children that were conceived during a playback of Barry White's greatest hits?
Would they like a cut of the combined wages of a man and his wife who met at a concert?
How long until certain sea-mammals are hunted down and killed due to flagrant public performances of the legendary Whale Song Anthems 7?I have no idea how much coke it must have taken for these people to get such an overblown sense of their own importance, but I'm hoping they carry on.
Behaviour like this reminds me of the marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832449</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256154840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The question is... why doesn't this type of idiot realize "they've gone too far" *before* they go and document their cretinism for the rest of us?  These dolts seem endemic to the human race.  We should not have locked up the tigers....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is... why does n't this type of idiot realize " they 've gone too far " * before * they go and document their cretinism for the rest of us ?
These dolts seem endemic to the human race .
We should not have locked up the tigers... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is... why doesn't this type of idiot realize "they've gone too far" *before* they go and document their cretinism for the rest of us?
These dolts seem endemic to the human race.
We should not have locked up the tigers....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837035</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1256234340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is the alphabet in that order? Is it because of that song? The guy who wrote that song wrote everything!</p><p>--Steven Wright</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is the alphabet in that order ?
Is it because of that song ?
The guy who wrote that song wrote everything ! --Steven Wright</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is the alphabet in that order?
Is it because of that song?
The guy who wrote that song wrote everything!--Steven Wright</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834119</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1256219520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Im not clear on how this would work-- they take you to court and explain you are legally obligated to pay them....how?  Would you even need a lawyer for that case?
<br> <br>
Why cant you just ignore them?  Just because they claim they have legal recourse doesnt make it true.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Im not clear on how this would work-- they take you to court and explain you are legally obligated to pay them....how ?
Would you even need a lawyer for that case ?
Why cant you just ignore them ?
Just because they claim they have legal recourse doesnt make it true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im not clear on how this would work-- they take you to court and explain you are legally obligated to pay them....how?
Would you even need a lawyer for that case?
Why cant you just ignore them?
Just because they claim they have legal recourse doesnt make it true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833321</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1256211000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I rather like the idea of corporate representatives punishing people for spouting corporate content, which is what popular shit culture really is nowadays.</p><p>Things will have to get much worse before they provoke a backlash against corporate media, so I want that to happen. The people shouldn't want the garbage that has displaced creativity, and suing them for singing it amuses me greatly. (Cue the famous Bill Hicks line about "suckers of Satan's cock" in the entertainment industry!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I rather like the idea of corporate representatives punishing people for spouting corporate content , which is what popular shit culture really is nowadays.Things will have to get much worse before they provoke a backlash against corporate media , so I want that to happen .
The people should n't want the garbage that has displaced creativity , and suing them for singing it amuses me greatly .
( Cue the famous Bill Hicks line about " suckers of Satan 's cock " in the entertainment industry !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I rather like the idea of corporate representatives punishing people for spouting corporate content, which is what popular shit culture really is nowadays.Things will have to get much worse before they provoke a backlash against corporate media, so I want that to happen.
The people shouldn't want the garbage that has displaced creativity, and suing them for singing it amuses me greatly.
(Cue the famous Bill Hicks line about "suckers of Satan's cock" in the entertainment industry!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833187</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one day stores will have to make customers choose between paying to listen to the music being played and wearing perfectly isolating earcaps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one day stores will have to make customers choose between paying to listen to the music being played and wearing perfectly isolating earcaps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one day stores will have to make customers choose between paying to listen to the music being played and wearing perfectly isolating earcaps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833745</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Loosifur</author>
	<datestamp>1256216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My God, where are these nightmarish, Orwellian bistros people are talking about?? I live in the DC area and have worked in restaurants for about fifteen years. In each and every one we played music in the kitchen; granted, sometimes it was in Spanish, but still. Radio, cd or ipod, no one ever said anything. I've never heard of an instance in my area where playing music at a workplace resulted in copyright violation warnings or anything of the sort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My God , where are these nightmarish , Orwellian bistros people are talking about ? ?
I live in the DC area and have worked in restaurants for about fifteen years .
In each and every one we played music in the kitchen ; granted , sometimes it was in Spanish , but still .
Radio , cd or ipod , no one ever said anything .
I 've never heard of an instance in my area where playing music at a workplace resulted in copyright violation warnings or anything of the sort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My God, where are these nightmarish, Orwellian bistros people are talking about??
I live in the DC area and have worked in restaurants for about fifteen years.
In each and every one we played music in the kitchen; granted, sometimes it was in Spanish, but still.
Radio, cd or ipod, no one ever said anything.
I've never heard of an instance in my area where playing music at a workplace resulted in copyright violation warnings or anything of the sort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832771</id>
	<title>It's not april 1st</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256203560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a joke right?</p><p>ok guys really funny... hahahaha</p><p>guys?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a joke right ? ok guys really funny... hahahahaguys ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a joke right?ok guys really funny... hahahahaguys?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838867</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256242440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Err, no. It's applying the concept of government regulation to information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Err , no .
It 's applying the concept of government regulation to information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Err, no.
It's applying the concept of government regulation to information.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833105</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833345</id>
	<title>Brain scans</title>
	<author>jellybear</author>
	<datestamp>1256211360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What'd be awesome is if someday they could scan people's brains and, if they had a song stuck in their head, automatically charge their credit card or bank account.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 'd be awesome is if someday they could scan people 's brains and , if they had a song stuck in their head , automatically charge their credit card or bank account .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What'd be awesome is if someday they could scan people's brains and, if they had a song stuck in their head, automatically charge their credit card or bank account.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833641</id>
	<title>They've gotten all they will get from me</title>
	<author>WCMI92</author>
	<datestamp>1256215680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to buy a lot of music.  But that was before pretty much all new pop/rock became nothing more but the same talentless cookie cutter template done over and over and over.  My desire for new music died with the death of the guitar solo, which was around 1994 or so.</p><p>I already have all the stuff I really want from the 60's-80's classic rock era, and you couldn't PAY me to download the current emotrash crap.</p><p>Frankly, I think the RIAA and their foreign bretheren know that the industry is dead, and want to continue to make money over and over again on stuff that is 25+ years old and long since "paid for".  I also think the current talentless generation of "artists" is by design, there probably are as many talented people today as there were 20+ years ago, but they just don't get record contracts anymore as they can't be controlled, used, abused, sucked dry, then left on the corner turning tricks for crack like these manufactured "wonders" of today can be.</p><p>When I do stumble onto FM radio these days, especially to a rock station, it amazes me how long this crappy, played out, "whinerband" emo sound has outlived whatever usefulness it once had.  People used to say the "hair bands" of my day lacked talent.  Yet, that era lasted what, 4 years, and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.</p><p>Go figure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to buy a lot of music .
But that was before pretty much all new pop/rock became nothing more but the same talentless cookie cutter template done over and over and over .
My desire for new music died with the death of the guitar solo , which was around 1994 or so.I already have all the stuff I really want from the 60 's-80 's classic rock era , and you could n't PAY me to download the current emotrash crap.Frankly , I think the RIAA and their foreign bretheren know that the industry is dead , and want to continue to make money over and over again on stuff that is 25 + years old and long since " paid for " .
I also think the current talentless generation of " artists " is by design , there probably are as many talented people today as there were 20 + years ago , but they just do n't get record contracts anymore as they ca n't be controlled , used , abused , sucked dry , then left on the corner turning tricks for crack like these manufactured " wonders " of today can be.When I do stumble onto FM radio these days , especially to a rock station , it amazes me how long this crappy , played out , " whinerband " emo sound has outlived whatever usefulness it once had .
People used to say the " hair bands " of my day lacked talent .
Yet , that era lasted what , 4 years , and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.Go figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to buy a lot of music.
But that was before pretty much all new pop/rock became nothing more but the same talentless cookie cutter template done over and over and over.
My desire for new music died with the death of the guitar solo, which was around 1994 or so.I already have all the stuff I really want from the 60's-80's classic rock era, and you couldn't PAY me to download the current emotrash crap.Frankly, I think the RIAA and their foreign bretheren know that the industry is dead, and want to continue to make money over and over again on stuff that is 25+ years old and long since "paid for".
I also think the current talentless generation of "artists" is by design, there probably are as many talented people today as there were 20+ years ago, but they just don't get record contracts anymore as they can't be controlled, used, abused, sucked dry, then left on the corner turning tricks for crack like these manufactured "wonders" of today can be.When I do stumble onto FM radio these days, especially to a rock station, it amazes me how long this crappy, played out, "whinerband" emo sound has outlived whatever usefulness it once had.
People used to say the "hair bands" of my day lacked talent.
Yet, that era lasted what, 4 years, and today they STILL play it and people will still go to see those bands.Go figure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836221</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>houghi</author>
	<datestamp>1256230980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95\% of time totally correct. The other 5\% of the time, its stuff I know about.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I once asked a internet magazine in Belgium why they would print all the wrong information. Their asnwer was that the people who knew the right answers would not read it and people who don't would not mind.<br>They also 'tested' speed to and from providers while they had only one single account they recieved for free from a provider.</p><p>Strangely enough that provider was always the fastest. What they did was just a ping to the providers website. Uncompetent!</p><p>The hardware tests they did were basicaly copy and paste from the press releases.</p><p>A newspaper I once contacted to pint out that the story they published was untrue was answerd by 'we can not release the source of our information'.</p><p>In all honesty that same newspaper interviewed me once. They re-read the interview, did the changes I requested and almost verbatim placed it in their newspaper. The trick with talking to journmalists is that you must know what you want to say and then say it as if you were talking to a 6 year old. Short centences. Not using the word 'no' also helps.</p><p>Just say what you want. I did not ignore the question, but looked at it not as something I needed to answer, but rather take the subject and comment on that subject.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95 \ % of time totally correct .
The other 5 \ % of the time , its stuff I know about .
I once asked a internet magazine in Belgium why they would print all the wrong information .
Their asnwer was that the people who knew the right answers would not read it and people who do n't would not mind.They also 'tested ' speed to and from providers while they had only one single account they recieved for free from a provider.Strangely enough that provider was always the fastest .
What they did was just a ping to the providers website .
Uncompetent ! The hardware tests they did were basicaly copy and paste from the press releases.A newspaper I once contacted to pint out that the story they published was untrue was answerd by 'we can not release the source of our information'.In all honesty that same newspaper interviewed me once .
They re-read the interview , did the changes I requested and almost verbatim placed it in their newspaper .
The trick with talking to journmalists is that you must know what you want to say and then say it as if you were talking to a 6 year old .
Short centences .
Not using the word 'no ' also helps.Just say what you want .
I did not ignore the question , but looked at it not as something I needed to answer , but rather take the subject and comment on that subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone knows that news outlets are 95\% of time totally correct.
The other 5\% of the time, its stuff I know about.
I once asked a internet magazine in Belgium why they would print all the wrong information.
Their asnwer was that the people who knew the right answers would not read it and people who don't would not mind.They also 'tested' speed to and from providers while they had only one single account they recieved for free from a provider.Strangely enough that provider was always the fastest.
What they did was just a ping to the providers website.
Uncompetent!The hardware tests they did were basicaly copy and paste from the press releases.A newspaper I once contacted to pint out that the story they published was untrue was answerd by 'we can not release the source of our information'.In all honesty that same newspaper interviewed me once.
They re-read the interview, did the changes I requested and almost verbatim placed it in their newspaper.
The trick with talking to journmalists is that you must know what you want to say and then say it as if you were talking to a 6 year old.
Short centences.
Not using the word 'no' also helps.Just say what you want.
I did not ignore the question, but looked at it not as something I needed to answer, but rather take the subject and comment on that subject.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834139</id>
	<title>tax ASCAP/BMI</title>
	<author>whosyourslashdotdad</author>
	<datestamp>1256219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think an argument could be made that societies support of the musical arts through public schools and other government agencies is responsible for the development of a lot of the artists out there. I propose a 100\% tax on ASCAP/BMI/SESAC revenues to repay us... actually as an afterthought let's just outlaw those type of taxes for public performance and call it even.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think an argument could be made that societies support of the musical arts through public schools and other government agencies is responsible for the development of a lot of the artists out there .
I propose a 100 \ % tax on ASCAP/BMI/SESAC revenues to repay us... actually as an afterthought let 's just outlaw those type of taxes for public performance and call it even .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think an argument could be made that societies support of the musical arts through public schools and other government agencies is responsible for the development of a lot of the artists out there.
I propose a 100\% tax on ASCAP/BMI/SESAC revenues to repay us... actually as an afterthought let's just outlaw those type of taxes for public performance and call it even.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841619</id>
	<title>I'm going to fuck you all up!</title>
	<author>failedlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1256215560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I were a recording artist, I'd be recording a track of what sounds like someone typing on a keyboard. Therefore anyone typing on a keyboard, would be violating the copyright. So there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... I know that most people on Slashdot type on a keyboard. You'd all be fucked. Who needs karaoke wannabes to make serious dough?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were a recording artist , I 'd be recording a track of what sounds like someone typing on a keyboard .
Therefore anyone typing on a keyboard , would be violating the copyright .
So there ..... I know that most people on Slashdot type on a keyboard .
You 'd all be fucked .
Who needs karaoke wannabes to make serious dough ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were a recording artist, I'd be recording a track of what sounds like someone typing on a keyboard.
Therefore anyone typing on a keyboard, would be violating the copyright.
So there ..... I know that most people on Slashdot type on a keyboard.
You'd all be fucked.
Who needs karaoke wannabes to make serious dough?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832299</id>
	<title>America! (in a palin voice)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's so much anti-US sentent on this site that I just can't resist. This shit doesn't and can't happen in the US.</p><p>Maybe a lttle too patriotic but damn I love my country and yes I've been drinking</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's so much anti-US sentent on this site that I just ca n't resist .
This shit does n't and ca n't happen in the US.Maybe a lttle too patriotic but damn I love my country and yes I 've been drinking</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's so much anti-US sentent on this site that I just can't resist.
This shit doesn't and can't happen in the US.Maybe a lttle too patriotic but damn I love my country and yes I've been drinking</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909</id>
	<title>Re:I'm just waiting for...</title>
	<author>mickwd</author>
	<datestamp>1256205240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You got moderated funny.</p><p>Read the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2276621.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">appalling truth</a> [bbc.co.uk].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You got moderated funny.Read the appalling truth [ bbc.co.uk ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got moderated funny.Read the appalling truth [bbc.co.uk].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833709</id>
	<title>Re:What did you expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Normal property isn't much better.</p><p>I'm of course talking about Proudhon definition of property, not just plain old stuff like your toothbrush, but property as in capital that generates capital.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Normal property is n't much better.I 'm of course talking about Proudhon definition of property , not just plain old stuff like your toothbrush , but property as in capital that generates capital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Normal property isn't much better.I'm of course talking about Proudhon definition of property, not just plain old stuff like your toothbrush, but property as in capital that generates capital.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837803</id>
	<title>rise up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256237460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is soon to become so draconian that Artists and people in the industry will personally suffer. I know that I already have no respect for music industry people. For some, there will be open hostility. It wont be long before someone legally suffering under the current regime will retaliate in the real world...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is soon to become so draconian that Artists and people in the industry will personally suffer .
I know that I already have no respect for music industry people .
For some , there will be open hostility .
It wont be long before someone legally suffering under the current regime will retaliate in the real world.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is soon to become so draconian that Artists and people in the industry will personally suffer.
I know that I already have no respect for music industry people.
For some, there will be open hostility.
It wont be long before someone legally suffering under the current regime will retaliate in the real world...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</id>
	<title>Hoax</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has all the marks of a hoax.  Even if it's not, still, consider the current media climate in which journalists don't check sources but simply reprint crap that other newspapers cover.  Try it yourself...fax in a "press release" to the newspaper and then watch it appear in print the next day, unverified.  I used to do that when I worked at a government office, and I was just shocked that nobody ever called my phone number to check.  How many hoaxes has the press reported this year, so far?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has all the marks of a hoax .
Even if it 's not , still , consider the current media climate in which journalists do n't check sources but simply reprint crap that other newspapers cover .
Try it yourself...fax in a " press release " to the newspaper and then watch it appear in print the next day , unverified .
I used to do that when I worked at a government office , and I was just shocked that nobody ever called my phone number to check .
How many hoaxes has the press reported this year , so far ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has all the marks of a hoax.
Even if it's not, still, consider the current media climate in which journalists don't check sources but simply reprint crap that other newspapers cover.
Try it yourself...fax in a "press release" to the newspaper and then watch it appear in print the next day, unverified.
I used to do that when I worked at a government office, and I was just shocked that nobody ever called my phone number to check.
How many hoaxes has the press reported this year, so far?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479</id>
	<title>I'm just waiting for...</title>
	<author>TeethWhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1256241600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>...the estate of John Cage to sue everyone all the time for unlicensed performance of 4'33"</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the estate of John Cage to sue everyone all the time for unlicensed performance of 4'33 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the estate of John Cage to sue everyone all the time for unlicensed performance of 4'33"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832883</id>
	<title>Japan: been there, done that</title>
	<author>oheso</author>
	<datestamp>1256204940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A bar owner in Japan was ordered to pay royalties for playing the harmonica for his customers. As far as I know, the decision has stuck.</p><p><a href="http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2006/11/10/elderly-harmoni.html" title="ito.com" rel="nofollow">http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2006/11/10/elderly-harmoni.html</a> [ito.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A bar owner in Japan was ordered to pay royalties for playing the harmonica for his customers .
As far as I know , the decision has stuck.http : //joi.ito.com/weblog/2006/11/10/elderly-harmoni.html [ ito.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A bar owner in Japan was ordered to pay royalties for playing the harmonica for his customers.
As far as I know, the decision has stuck.http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2006/11/10/elderly-harmoni.html [ito.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832545</id>
	<title>Honestly, this needs to stop, NOW.</title>
	<author>theolein</author>
	<datestamp>1256243340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I simply cannot believe this. This insanity needs to be stopped right now. My next vote will go to the Pirate Party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I simply can not believe this .
This insanity needs to be stopped right now .
My next vote will go to the Pirate Party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I simply cannot believe this.
This insanity needs to be stopped right now.
My next vote will go to the Pirate Party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833019</id>
	<title>Professional litigants</title>
	<author>dugeen</author>
	<datestamp>1256207040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A classic tale from New Labour Britain - any organisation that can afford to retain lawyers can demand money from innocent people with impunity, because the victims can't afford to defend themselves, even when the alleged tort is, as in this case, non-existent.

Holders of rights to songs - often corporations and not songwriters - enjoy a uniquely privileged position under capitalism, receiving as they do a continuing share of the surplus value from their labour. If they want the rest of us to continue to allow them that privilege, they should review their policy of paying the PRS to threaten nuisance lawsuits on their behalf.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A classic tale from New Labour Britain - any organisation that can afford to retain lawyers can demand money from innocent people with impunity , because the victims ca n't afford to defend themselves , even when the alleged tort is , as in this case , non-existent .
Holders of rights to songs - often corporations and not songwriters - enjoy a uniquely privileged position under capitalism , receiving as they do a continuing share of the surplus value from their labour .
If they want the rest of us to continue to allow them that privilege , they should review their policy of paying the PRS to threaten nuisance lawsuits on their behalf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A classic tale from New Labour Britain - any organisation that can afford to retain lawyers can demand money from innocent people with impunity, because the victims can't afford to defend themselves, even when the alleged tort is, as in this case, non-existent.
Holders of rights to songs - often corporations and not songwriters - enjoy a uniquely privileged position under capitalism, receiving as they do a continuing share of the surplus value from their labour.
If they want the rest of us to continue to allow them that privilege, they should review their policy of paying the PRS to threaten nuisance lawsuits on their behalf.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843281</id>
	<title>Re:What did you expect?</title>
	<author>gormanbud</author>
	<datestamp>1256240520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Help me a song keeps playing over and over inside my head. The cash register keeps ringing up money every time the song starts over.  I am broke.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Help me a song keeps playing over and over inside my head .
The cash register keeps ringing up money every time the song starts over .
I am broke .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Help me a song keeps playing over and over inside my head.
The cash register keeps ringing up money every time the song starts over.
I am broke.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841283</id>
	<title>I would like that as a "net radio" stream.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256213100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heck, if there was a shoutcast station that only played songs from the Archive.org CC music I'd listen to it. (I'm picking archive.org because they seem to be the biggest resource for that kind of stuff that I know of. And I think indexing under the random stations listing would be appropriate.) Trying to find the good CC music is a bit of a process in itself (so much crazy random stuff), yet within the midst of many low quality tracks that may as well be "Joe Shmoe singing in the shower as recorded by a friend who thinks it's funny" I have found quality music that is quite enjoyable. Music that rivals or exceeds the quality of stuff put out by the big studios that drive pop-media. Things like public orchestra performances, or indie artists with a nice home studio setup, cool electronica synth grooves, or a good bootleg from a feed by provided by some jam or ska band during their live performance. (Yes, there are some real gems to be found in every genre if you are patient enough to browse through the mediocre randomness to find them.)</p><p>Here's how I'd set programming for the All CC Shoutcast Station: Its playlist is determined by email requests and a limited repeat policy per day. (With enough listeners contributing, good stuff should come up to the top fairly quick.) There would also be one day of the week that is a truely random playlist as chosen by a computer to help bring up new stuff. (Basically an automated version of the haystack sorting one does when browsing for new interesting CC tunes.) And there may be a special genre day or session where all music picked and sent in has to fit a random-picked genre. There would be some mention of a paypal address for donations after every 10 songs or so, such that getting listener sponsorship shouldn't be a problem - and to keep the station commercial free. There would be some DJ chatter about upcoming playlist music and genre-day features, but other than that it would be minimal. (This makes me wonder why Archive.org isn't doing that already.)</p><p>If there is such a "net radio" shoutcast station already, I'd like to know. (I doubt any there's any real radio station other than college or pirate would try this, since broadcast rights on the "public" airwaves are bought and paid for by big media.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heck , if there was a shoutcast station that only played songs from the Archive.org CC music I 'd listen to it .
( I 'm picking archive.org because they seem to be the biggest resource for that kind of stuff that I know of .
And I think indexing under the random stations listing would be appropriate .
) Trying to find the good CC music is a bit of a process in itself ( so much crazy random stuff ) , yet within the midst of many low quality tracks that may as well be " Joe Shmoe singing in the shower as recorded by a friend who thinks it 's funny " I have found quality music that is quite enjoyable .
Music that rivals or exceeds the quality of stuff put out by the big studios that drive pop-media .
Things like public orchestra performances , or indie artists with a nice home studio setup , cool electronica synth grooves , or a good bootleg from a feed by provided by some jam or ska band during their live performance .
( Yes , there are some real gems to be found in every genre if you are patient enough to browse through the mediocre randomness to find them .
) Here 's how I 'd set programming for the All CC Shoutcast Station : Its playlist is determined by email requests and a limited repeat policy per day .
( With enough listeners contributing , good stuff should come up to the top fairly quick .
) There would also be one day of the week that is a truely random playlist as chosen by a computer to help bring up new stuff .
( Basically an automated version of the haystack sorting one does when browsing for new interesting CC tunes .
) And there may be a special genre day or session where all music picked and sent in has to fit a random-picked genre .
There would be some mention of a paypal address for donations after every 10 songs or so , such that getting listener sponsorship should n't be a problem - and to keep the station commercial free .
There would be some DJ chatter about upcoming playlist music and genre-day features , but other than that it would be minimal .
( This makes me wonder why Archive.org is n't doing that already .
) If there is such a " net radio " shoutcast station already , I 'd like to know .
( I doubt any there 's any real radio station other than college or pirate would try this , since broadcast rights on the " public " airwaves are bought and paid for by big media .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heck, if there was a shoutcast station that only played songs from the Archive.org CC music I'd listen to it.
(I'm picking archive.org because they seem to be the biggest resource for that kind of stuff that I know of.
And I think indexing under the random stations listing would be appropriate.
) Trying to find the good CC music is a bit of a process in itself (so much crazy random stuff), yet within the midst of many low quality tracks that may as well be "Joe Shmoe singing in the shower as recorded by a friend who thinks it's funny" I have found quality music that is quite enjoyable.
Music that rivals or exceeds the quality of stuff put out by the big studios that drive pop-media.
Things like public orchestra performances, or indie artists with a nice home studio setup, cool electronica synth grooves, or a good bootleg from a feed by provided by some jam or ska band during their live performance.
(Yes, there are some real gems to be found in every genre if you are patient enough to browse through the mediocre randomness to find them.
)Here's how I'd set programming for the All CC Shoutcast Station: Its playlist is determined by email requests and a limited repeat policy per day.
(With enough listeners contributing, good stuff should come up to the top fairly quick.
) There would also be one day of the week that is a truely random playlist as chosen by a computer to help bring up new stuff.
(Basically an automated version of the haystack sorting one does when browsing for new interesting CC tunes.
) And there may be a special genre day or session where all music picked and sent in has to fit a random-picked genre.
There would be some mention of a paypal address for donations after every 10 songs or so, such that getting listener sponsorship shouldn't be a problem - and to keep the station commercial free.
There would be some DJ chatter about upcoming playlist music and genre-day features, but other than that it would be minimal.
(This makes me wonder why Archive.org isn't doing that already.
)If there is such a "net radio" shoutcast station already, I'd like to know.
(I doubt any there's any real radio station other than college or pirate would try this, since broadcast rights on the "public" airwaves are bought and paid for by big media.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</id>
	<title>The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256153400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, she was ordered to pay royalties.  However, shortly afterward, the company sent her flowers, and issued a formal apology (ie, they realized they went *way* too far).
<br> <br>
and I quote the article...<br>
"In a note attached to a large bouquet of flowers they said: "We're very sorry we made a big mistake.   We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck." "</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , she was ordered to pay royalties .
However , shortly afterward , the company sent her flowers , and issued a formal apology ( ie , they realized they went * way * too far ) .
and I quote the article.. . " In a note attached to a large bouquet of flowers they said : " We 're very sorry we made a big mistake .
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck .
" "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, she was ordered to pay royalties.
However, shortly afterward, the company sent her flowers, and issued a formal apology (ie, they realized they went *way* too far).
and I quote the article...
"In a note attached to a large bouquet of flowers they said: "We're very sorry we made a big mistake.
We hear you have a lovely singing voice and we wish you good luck.
" "
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832915</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1256205300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's next? Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary?</p></div><p>Not sure about the Concise Oxford but I'm pretty sure that I was charged something like 20 or 30  for the New Oxford Dictionary sitting on the shelf behind me. Maybe they changed their way of doing things since then.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's next ?
Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary ? Not sure about the Concise Oxford but I 'm pretty sure that I was charged something like 20 or 30 for the New Oxford Dictionary sitting on the shelf behind me .
Maybe they changed their way of doing things since then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's next?
Concise Oxford charging for words explained in the dictionary?Not sure about the Concise Oxford but I'm pretty sure that I was charged something like 20 or 30  for the New Oxford Dictionary sitting on the shelf behind me.
Maybe they changed their way of doing things since then.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281</id>
	<title>What did you expect?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a logical extension of current lunatic copyright laws: the IP Barons want a cut every time anyone, anywhere, performs a song they claim to 'own'. The next step will be to require everyone to wear brain-scanners so that they can charge us every time we 'play' a song inside our heads from memory.</p><p>The whole concept of Imaginary Property leads directly to this kind of stupidity, because the very idea of being able to 'own' something which has no physical existence is quite simply insane.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a logical extension of current lunatic copyright laws : the IP Barons want a cut every time anyone , anywhere , performs a song they claim to 'own' .
The next step will be to require everyone to wear brain-scanners so that they can charge us every time we 'play ' a song inside our heads from memory.The whole concept of Imaginary Property leads directly to this kind of stupidity , because the very idea of being able to 'own ' something which has no physical existence is quite simply insane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a logical extension of current lunatic copyright laws: the IP Barons want a cut every time anyone, anywhere, performs a song they claim to 'own'.
The next step will be to require everyone to wear brain-scanners so that they can charge us every time we 'play' a song inside our heads from memory.The whole concept of Imaginary Property leads directly to this kind of stupidity, because the very idea of being able to 'own' something which has no physical existence is quite simply insane.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833761</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256216820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Money, money, money<br>Must be funny<br>In the rich mans world<br>Money, money, money<br>Always sunny<br>In the rich mans world<br>Aha-ahaaa<br>All the things I could do<br>If I had a little money<br>Its a rich mans world</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Money , money , moneyMust be funnyIn the rich mans worldMoney , money , moneyAlways sunnyIn the rich mans worldAha-ahaaaAll the things I could doIf I had a little moneyIts a rich mans world</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Money, money, moneyMust be funnyIn the rich mans worldMoney, money, moneyAlways sunnyIn the rich mans worldAha-ahaaaAll the things I could doIf I had a little moneyIts a rich mans world</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833373</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>TheDarkMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1256211840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ignore the PRS, and if they send lawers, kill then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ignore the PRS , and if they send lawers , kill then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ignore the PRS, and if they send lawers, kill then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834537</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>cpotoso</author>
	<datestamp>1256222520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have stopped buying cd's about 7 years ago...  I also used to buy many cd's a month.  But lets be honest, the real reason is that I am getting old<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have stopped buying cd 's about 7 years ago... I also used to buy many cd 's a month .
But lets be honest , the real reason is that I am getting old : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have stopped buying cd's about 7 years ago...  I also used to buy many cd's a month.
But lets be honest, the real reason is that I am getting old :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836209</id>
	<title>The greed!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256230920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, do cab drivers have to turn their radios off when giving a ride to a customer?</p><p>Am I allowed to turn up the music in my car if people walking streets can hear it?</p><p>Are companies allowed to have music playing in washrooms used by all employees?</p><p>Am I allowed to play a guitar for friends and family?</p><p>What about karaoke bars?  What about regular bars playing radio?</p><p>Greed will kill out all of these so called musicians and song writers... the worst thing is that they will blame it on piracy and general population being too musically able to reproduce songs they hear... they are killing themselves, and they are the only people to blame for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , do cab drivers have to turn their radios off when giving a ride to a customer ? Am I allowed to turn up the music in my car if people walking streets can hear it ? Are companies allowed to have music playing in washrooms used by all employees ? Am I allowed to play a guitar for friends and family ? What about karaoke bars ?
What about regular bars playing radio ? Greed will kill out all of these so called musicians and song writers... the worst thing is that they will blame it on piracy and general population being too musically able to reproduce songs they hear... they are killing themselves , and they are the only people to blame for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, do cab drivers have to turn their radios off when giving a ride to a customer?Am I allowed to turn up the music in my car if people walking streets can hear it?Are companies allowed to have music playing in washrooms used by all employees?Am I allowed to play a guitar for friends and family?What about karaoke bars?
What about regular bars playing radio?Greed will kill out all of these so called musicians and song writers... the worst thing is that they will blame it on piracy and general population being too musically able to reproduce songs they hear... they are killing themselves, and they are the only people to blame for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837837</id>
	<title>Wordsworth: The Solitary Reaper</title>
	<author>t\_ban</author>
	<datestamp>1256237580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Behold her, single in the field,<br>Yon solitary Highland Lass!<br>Reaping and singing by herself;<br>Stop here, or gently pass!<br>Alone she cuts and binds the grain,<br>And sings a melancholy strain;<br>O listen! for the Vale profound<br>Is overflowing with the sound.</p><p>No Nightingale did ever chaunt<br>More welcome notes to weary bands<br>Of travellers in some shady haunt,<br>Among Arabian sands:<br>A voice so thrilling ne'er was heard<br>In spring-time from the Cuckoo-bird,<br>Breaking the silence of the seas<br>Among the farthest Hebrides.</p><p>Will no one tell me what she sings?--<br>Perhaps the plaintive numbers flow<br>For old, unhappy, far-off things,<br>And battles long ago:<br>Or is it some more humble lay,<br>Familiar matter of to-day?<br>Some natural sorrow, loss, or pain,<br>That has been, and may be again?</p><p>Whate'er the theme, the Maiden sang<br>As if her song could have no ending;<br>I saw her singing at her work,<br>And o'er the sickle bending;--<br>I listened, motionless and still;<br>And, as I mounted up the hill,<br>The music in my heart I bore,<br>Long after it was heard no more.</p></div><p>I wonder whom the poet was addressing when he said 'stop here, or gently pass' -- was it RIAA agents?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Behold her , single in the field,Yon solitary Highland Lass ! Reaping and singing by herself ; Stop here , or gently pass ! Alone she cuts and binds the grain,And sings a melancholy strain ; O listen !
for the Vale profoundIs overflowing with the sound.No Nightingale did ever chauntMore welcome notes to weary bandsOf travellers in some shady haunt,Among Arabian sands : A voice so thrilling ne'er was heardIn spring-time from the Cuckoo-bird,Breaking the silence of the seasAmong the farthest Hebrides.Will no one tell me what she sings ? --Perhaps the plaintive numbers flowFor old , unhappy , far-off things,And battles long ago : Or is it some more humble lay,Familiar matter of to-day ? Some natural sorrow , loss , or pain,That has been , and may be again ? Whate'er the theme , the Maiden sangAs if her song could have no ending ; I saw her singing at her work,And o'er the sickle bending ; --I listened , motionless and still ; And , as I mounted up the hill,The music in my heart I bore,Long after it was heard no more.I wonder whom the poet was addressing when he said 'stop here , or gently pass ' -- was it RIAA agents ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Behold her, single in the field,Yon solitary Highland Lass!Reaping and singing by herself;Stop here, or gently pass!Alone she cuts and binds the grain,And sings a melancholy strain;O listen!
for the Vale profoundIs overflowing with the sound.No Nightingale did ever chauntMore welcome notes to weary bandsOf travellers in some shady haunt,Among Arabian sands:A voice so thrilling ne'er was heardIn spring-time from the Cuckoo-bird,Breaking the silence of the seasAmong the farthest Hebrides.Will no one tell me what she sings?--Perhaps the plaintive numbers flowFor old, unhappy, far-off things,And battles long ago:Or is it some more humble lay,Familiar matter of to-day?Some natural sorrow, loss, or pain,That has been, and may be again?Whate'er the theme, the Maiden sangAs if her song could have no ending;I saw her singing at her work,And o'er the sickle bending;--I listened, motionless and still;And, as I mounted up the hill,The music in my heart I bore,Long after it was heard no more.I wonder whom the poet was addressing when he said 'stop here, or gently pass' -- was it RIAA agents?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833191</id>
	<title>Boycott everything copyrighted</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be a way out, back to a more sane, public domain society, which values common goods.</p><p>People who want power over everyone and anything are a real PITA. But they have no more power than we let them have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be a way out , back to a more sane , public domain society , which values common goods.People who want power over everyone and anything are a real PITA .
But they have no more power than we let them have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be a way out, back to a more sane, public domain society, which values common goods.People who want power over everyone and anything are a real PITA.
But they have no more power than we let them have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832451</id>
	<title>Re:The company apologized</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256154840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The company didn't realize anything. They were cowed into submission by an understandably outraged public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The company did n't realize anything .
They were cowed into submission by an understandably outraged public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company didn't realize anything.
They were cowed into submission by an understandably outraged public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833819</id>
	<title>Radio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't get it ? Why should you have to pay anything for radio? After all if they didn't want you to listen to it thay could digtally encrypt the programm.<br>If i switch on a light and it illuminates your garden i have no right to ask you to pay for that!  I am free to do what ever i want with those photons right?<br>So where's the difference? It is your fault if you encode unencrypted information in your photons. After all you are the one that is activley forcing my RLC curcuit to start oscillating. I just posess a Resisito Inductor and a Capacitor, items which i am legally entitled to own and connect with wires any way I want.<br>I think charging people for beeing hit by photons goes is to much. Next time i see someone from the PRS i will flsh my flshlight in his face and send a message in morse code, then he has to pay royalities to me right? After all i made that Message and therefore i have the copyright, It is not my fault, that his eyes were capable of coverting the stream of photons i choose to throw at him into an useful Message.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't get it ?
Why should you have to pay anything for radio ?
After all if they did n't want you to listen to it thay could digtally encrypt the programm.If i switch on a light and it illuminates your garden i have no right to ask you to pay for that !
I am free to do what ever i want with those photons right ? So where 's the difference ?
It is your fault if you encode unencrypted information in your photons .
After all you are the one that is activley forcing my RLC curcuit to start oscillating .
I just posess a Resisito Inductor and a Capacitor , items which i am legally entitled to own and connect with wires any way I want.I think charging people for beeing hit by photons goes is to much .
Next time i see someone from the PRS i will flsh my flshlight in his face and send a message in morse code , then he has to pay royalities to me right ?
After all i made that Message and therefore i have the copyright , It is not my fault , that his eyes were capable of coverting the stream of photons i choose to throw at him into an useful Message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't get it ?
Why should you have to pay anything for radio?
After all if they didn't want you to listen to it thay could digtally encrypt the programm.If i switch on a light and it illuminates your garden i have no right to ask you to pay for that!
I am free to do what ever i want with those photons right?So where's the difference?
It is your fault if you encode unencrypted information in your photons.
After all you are the one that is activley forcing my RLC curcuit to start oscillating.
I just posess a Resisito Inductor and a Capacitor, items which i am legally entitled to own and connect with wires any way I want.I think charging people for beeing hit by photons goes is to much.
Next time i see someone from the PRS i will flsh my flshlight in his face and send a message in morse code, then he has to pay royalities to me right?
After all i made that Message and therefore i have the copyright, It is not my fault, that his eyes were capable of coverting the stream of photons i choose to throw at him into an useful Message.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834485</id>
	<title>Re:Brainwashing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256222160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>The money in music is driving me mad<br>They're not making music but money instead<br>And now this music is bugging my head<br>Can't we all awake so they can drop dead!?<br></tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>The money in music is driving me madThey 're not making music but money insteadAnd now this music is bugging my headCa n't we all awake so they can drop dead !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The money in music is driving me madThey're not making music but money insteadAnd now this music is bugging my headCan't we all awake so they can drop dead!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833785</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256217120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>However, you should be aware that music influences mood, hence how much money the customer is going to shell out to buy stuff at the grocery store...</p><p>In fast-foods you'll have fast-paced music because it makes people eat faster, therefore increasing the table turnover, hence how many people can get in your restaurant... Hence how much you earn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>However , you should be aware that music influences mood , hence how much money the customer is going to shell out to buy stuff at the grocery store...In fast-foods you 'll have fast-paced music because it makes people eat faster , therefore increasing the table turnover , hence how many people can get in your restaurant... Hence how much you earn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, you should be aware that music influences mood, hence how much money the customer is going to shell out to buy stuff at the grocery store...In fast-foods you'll have fast-paced music because it makes people eat faster, therefore increasing the table turnover, hence how many people can get in your restaurant... Hence how much you earn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832843</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256204340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a random kid in the train, it'd have to be the conductor himself singing, to have a perfect analogy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>"Last train to Glasgow Central...."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a random kid in the train , it 'd have to be the conductor himself singing , to have a perfect analogy ; ) " Last train to Glasgow Central.... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a random kid in the train, it'd have to be the conductor himself singing, to have a perfect analogy ;)"Last train to Glasgow Central...."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835811</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1256229120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with your point, but disagree in part with one of your arguments:<p><div class="quote"><p>People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak. They go there to buy food.</p></div><p>This is true; but at the same time, music has long been proven to affect the shopping and spending habits of people -- this has been refined to a scientific level. Different music will be played based on time of day and day of week - music that has been proven to encourage certain shopping patterns and behavior within the demographic that's present at that time.  Most of the people affected don't even realize it's happening (if they did, it wouldn't be nearly so effective).

</p><p>
I'm not so sure that this is what happened here - since the radio music isn't the same rather carefully planned and orchestrated selection of music that is ordinarily playing (which the markets DO pay for, as they should), I can't see how it fits into any category of requiring a royalty payment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with your point , but disagree in part with one of your arguments : People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak .
They go there to buy food.This is true ; but at the same time , music has long been proven to affect the shopping and spending habits of people -- this has been refined to a scientific level .
Different music will be played based on time of day and day of week - music that has been proven to encourage certain shopping patterns and behavior within the demographic that 's present at that time .
Most of the people affected do n't even realize it 's happening ( if they did , it would n't be nearly so effective ) .
I 'm not so sure that this is what happened here - since the radio music is n't the same rather carefully planned and orchestrated selection of music that is ordinarily playing ( which the markets DO pay for , as they should ) , I ca n't see how it fits into any category of requiring a royalty payment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with your point, but disagree in part with one of your arguments:People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak.
They go there to buy food.This is true; but at the same time, music has long been proven to affect the shopping and spending habits of people -- this has been refined to a scientific level.
Different music will be played based on time of day and day of week - music that has been proven to encourage certain shopping patterns and behavior within the demographic that's present at that time.
Most of the people affected don't even realize it's happening (if they did, it wouldn't be nearly so effective).
I'm not so sure that this is what happened here - since the radio music isn't the same rather carefully planned and orchestrated selection of music that is ordinarily playing (which the markets DO pay for, as they should), I can't see how it fits into any category of requiring a royalty payment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836149</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>sillyman71</author>
	<datestamp>1256230620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>We'll probably all get thrown in jail because our DNA contains genes someone patented.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll probably all get thrown in jail because our DNA contains genes someone patented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll probably all get thrown in jail because our DNA contains genes someone patented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835835</id>
	<title>Re:New alternative to censorship</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1256229300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I always call it a spell chequer, in honour of the poem "owed to a spell chequer".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I always call it a spell chequer , in honour of the poem " owed to a spell chequer " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I always call it a spell chequer, in honour of the poem "owed to a spell chequer".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833633</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257</id>
	<title>Silver lining?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As much as I think this kind of enforcement is ridiculous, before we try to get rid of it we should try to put it to good use: someone needs to get the scientologists to start singing top hits as part of their 'religion'. That would create a (lawyer) fight I would pay to watch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I think this kind of enforcement is ridiculous , before we try to get rid of it we should try to put it to good use : someone needs to get the scientologists to start singing top hits as part of their 'religion' .
That would create a ( lawyer ) fight I would pay to watch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I think this kind of enforcement is ridiculous, before we try to get rid of it we should try to put it to good use: someone needs to get the scientologists to start singing top hits as part of their 'religion'.
That would create a (lawyer) fight I would pay to watch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832585</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256243880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes! As soon as it is possible to monitor what's playing inside your head. How about a mandatory brain music activity monitoring implant that will automatically charge your credit card. Comes with a mute option that is used when you have no credit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes !
As soon as it is possible to monitor what 's playing inside your head .
How about a mandatory brain music activity monitoring implant that will automatically charge your credit card .
Comes with a mute option that is used when you have no credit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!
As soon as it is possible to monitor what's playing inside your head.
How about a mandatory brain music activity monitoring implant that will automatically charge your credit card.
Comes with a mute option that is used when you have no credit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832497</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838315</id>
	<title>Re:I'm just waiting for...</title>
	<author>TeethWhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1256239620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The really funny thing is that Cage actually composed several silent pieces.  How do you decide which one you're going to claim infringement on?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The really funny thing is that Cage actually composed several silent pieces .
How do you decide which one you 're going to claim infringement on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really funny thing is that Cage actually composed several silent pieces.
How do you decide which one you're going to claim infringement on?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842885</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution - Make $$$$ from it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256233440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What artists? The ones too busy working a day job because they can't make a living from music? Or the ones who never get to be at home with their families for more than a couple weeks at a time because they're constantly touring because recordings of their work are now valueless?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What artists ?
The ones too busy working a day job because they ca n't make a living from music ?
Or the ones who never get to be at home with their families for more than a couple weeks at a time because they 're constantly touring because recordings of their work are now valueless ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What artists?
The ones too busy working a day job because they can't make a living from music?
Or the ones who never get to be at home with their families for more than a couple weeks at a time because they're constantly touring because recordings of their work are now valueless?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832809</id>
	<title>Re:Silver lining?</title>
	<author>Xenographic</author>
	<datestamp>1256203980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a nice idea and all, but their lawyers would probably discover how much they have in common, quit fighting, and team up against the rest of us...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a nice idea and all , but their lawyers would probably discover how much they have in common , quit fighting , and team up against the rest of us.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a nice idea and all, but their lawyers would probably discover how much they have in common, quit fighting, and team up against the rest of us...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832267</id>
	<title>Easy solution to all this stupidity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It'd all work itself out if everytime someone exerted their copyright, the person they're exterting it against had a chance to go to court. And if the copyright holder fails, no more copyright.  It instantly becomes public domain.  The fact they can lose it would stop alot of this crap..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'd all work itself out if everytime someone exerted their copyright , the person they 're exterting it against had a chance to go to court .
And if the copyright holder fails , no more copyright .
It instantly becomes public domain .
The fact they can lose it would stop alot of this crap. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'd all work itself out if everytime someone exerted their copyright, the person they're exterting it against had a chance to go to court.
And if the copyright holder fails, no more copyright.
It instantly becomes public domain.
The fact they can lose it would stop alot of this crap..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835583</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256228220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>according to your analogy writing software code is equivalent to writing a hit song? I would think it was more like a secretary writing a stock letter she has written a thousand times, or a three line memo. No creativity, no need for it to be a hit in the first place for you to get paid. You get paid for every line you write. An artist gets paid on one song out of thousands. Your pay cheque is guaranteed even if that piece of code you write is crap, and you get paid even if you don't write a useable piece of code all day.</p><p>Enough of this crap where glorified data input clerks think they are doing something creative. Writing code is not a creative endeavor, there is no unifying universal theme being portrayed when a new window opens on your computer screen. You are not helping to further the discussion of the human condition with that fancy new flash animation you created for hounds-r-us. You are not an artist you are a programmer. The name itself screams of conformity.</p><p>Get over yourselves, the very fact that the piece of code you create can and will be created by any other programmer proves you are not an artist and essentially no different than a secretary. You input various pieces of information into an electronic or mechanical device to produce a desired outcome. Now while some artists are known to help themselves to parts of others music and call them original. If I was to come out with a song like say "Yesterday" by the Beatles, there is no way I can claim it as original. It is a independent piece of art, it has all the same chords and notes that many other songs have, but with the influence of the particular artists involved you have a song which has lasted 40 years and will most likely be played for many years after you or I are dead.  I know for certain that none of the code you write today will be around for more than 10 years.</p><p>Get over yourself, your a code flunkie, your not an artist, your not even close. Unless your one of theose new age hippies that feel everyone is an artist inside, from the janitor making the world beautiful with his toilet brush, to the trash collector picking up others memories. Everyone one wants to be special, guess what 99\% of us ARE NOT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>according to your analogy writing software code is equivalent to writing a hit song ?
I would think it was more like a secretary writing a stock letter she has written a thousand times , or a three line memo .
No creativity , no need for it to be a hit in the first place for you to get paid .
You get paid for every line you write .
An artist gets paid on one song out of thousands .
Your pay cheque is guaranteed even if that piece of code you write is crap , and you get paid even if you do n't write a useable piece of code all day.Enough of this crap where glorified data input clerks think they are doing something creative .
Writing code is not a creative endeavor , there is no unifying universal theme being portrayed when a new window opens on your computer screen .
You are not helping to further the discussion of the human condition with that fancy new flash animation you created for hounds-r-us .
You are not an artist you are a programmer .
The name itself screams of conformity.Get over yourselves , the very fact that the piece of code you create can and will be created by any other programmer proves you are not an artist and essentially no different than a secretary .
You input various pieces of information into an electronic or mechanical device to produce a desired outcome .
Now while some artists are known to help themselves to parts of others music and call them original .
If I was to come out with a song like say " Yesterday " by the Beatles , there is no way I can claim it as original .
It is a independent piece of art , it has all the same chords and notes that many other songs have , but with the influence of the particular artists involved you have a song which has lasted 40 years and will most likely be played for many years after you or I are dead .
I know for certain that none of the code you write today will be around for more than 10 years.Get over yourself , your a code flunkie , your not an artist , your not even close .
Unless your one of theose new age hippies that feel everyone is an artist inside , from the janitor making the world beautiful with his toilet brush , to the trash collector picking up others memories .
Everyone one wants to be special , guess what 99 \ % of us ARE NOT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>according to your analogy writing software code is equivalent to writing a hit song?
I would think it was more like a secretary writing a stock letter she has written a thousand times, or a three line memo.
No creativity, no need for it to be a hit in the first place for you to get paid.
You get paid for every line you write.
An artist gets paid on one song out of thousands.
Your pay cheque is guaranteed even if that piece of code you write is crap, and you get paid even if you don't write a useable piece of code all day.Enough of this crap where glorified data input clerks think they are doing something creative.
Writing code is not a creative endeavor, there is no unifying universal theme being portrayed when a new window opens on your computer screen.
You are not helping to further the discussion of the human condition with that fancy new flash animation you created for hounds-r-us.
You are not an artist you are a programmer.
The name itself screams of conformity.Get over yourselves, the very fact that the piece of code you create can and will be created by any other programmer proves you are not an artist and essentially no different than a secretary.
You input various pieces of information into an electronic or mechanical device to produce a desired outcome.
Now while some artists are known to help themselves to parts of others music and call them original.
If I was to come out with a song like say "Yesterday" by the Beatles, there is no way I can claim it as original.
It is a independent piece of art, it has all the same chords and notes that many other songs have, but with the influence of the particular artists involved you have a song which has lasted 40 years and will most likely be played for many years after you or I are dead.
I know for certain that none of the code you write today will be around for more than 10 years.Get over yourself, your a code flunkie, your not an artist, your not even close.
Unless your one of theose new age hippies that feel everyone is an artist inside, from the janitor making the world beautiful with his toilet brush, to the trash collector picking up others memories.
Everyone one wants to be special, guess what 99\% of us ARE NOT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837021</id>
	<title>This is the Central Scrutinizer...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256234280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...it is my responsibility to enforce all the laws<br>that haven't been passed yet. It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one of<br>you to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might be<br>performing which could eventually lead to The Death Penalty (or affect your parents'<br>credit rating). Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things...<br>and many of them were driven to these crimes by a horrible force called MUSIC! Our studies<br>have shown that this horrible force is so dangerous to society at large that laws are being<br>drawn up at this very moment to stop it forever! Cruel and inhuman punishments are<br>being carefully described in tiny paragraphs so they won't conflict with the Constitution<br>(which, itself, is being modified in order to accommodate THE FUTURE).</p><p>F. Zappa</p><p>I wonder how he could have forseen all this in 1979...</p><p>Me goes plooking a Telefunken 47...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...it is my responsibility to enforce all the lawsthat have n't been passed yet .
It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one ofyou to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might beperforming which could eventually lead to The Death Penalty ( or affect your parents'credit rating ) .
Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things...and many of them were driven to these crimes by a horrible force called MUSIC !
Our studieshave shown that this horrible force is so dangerous to society at large that laws are beingdrawn up at this very moment to stop it forever !
Cruel and inhuman punishments arebeing carefully described in tiny paragraphs so they wo n't conflict with the Constitution ( which , itself , is being modified in order to accommodate THE FUTURE ) .F .
ZappaI wonder how he could have forseen all this in 1979...Me goes plooking a Telefunken 47.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...it is my responsibility to enforce all the lawsthat haven't been passed yet.
It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one ofyou to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might beperforming which could eventually lead to The Death Penalty (or affect your parents'credit rating).
Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things...and many of them were driven to these crimes by a horrible force called MUSIC!
Our studieshave shown that this horrible force is so dangerous to society at large that laws are beingdrawn up at this very moment to stop it forever!
Cruel and inhuman punishments arebeing carefully described in tiny paragraphs so they won't conflict with the Constitution(which, itself, is being modified in order to accommodate THE FUTURE).F.
ZappaI wonder how he could have forseen all this in 1979...Me goes plooking a Telefunken 47...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29851595</id>
	<title>Pedro 48</title>
	<author>pedro1948</author>
	<datestamp>1256292000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a musician, I find this absolutely sickening. As a human being, I find this absolutely sickening. Music is special. It can create or change moods. It has a major effect on the brain.People used to record and release music because they thought it was good and could make them money. People who liked music ran those companies. Today, accountants and MBA's run those companies and you hear what you are getting, much less good music and more crap. As an old fart, I can tell you music is a lot worse with more crap to sort through to find the few good things to listen to. CD's are one or two hits and a lot of filler. The RIAA is a dinosaur and should die quietly. I used to get excited about new music and so did my friends. When's the last time someone said to you,"You gotta hear this, it's amazing"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a musician , I find this absolutely sickening .
As a human being , I find this absolutely sickening .
Music is special .
It can create or change moods .
It has a major effect on the brain.People used to record and release music because they thought it was good and could make them money .
People who liked music ran those companies .
Today , accountants and MBA 's run those companies and you hear what you are getting , much less good music and more crap .
As an old fart , I can tell you music is a lot worse with more crap to sort through to find the few good things to listen to .
CD 's are one or two hits and a lot of filler .
The RIAA is a dinosaur and should die quietly .
I used to get excited about new music and so did my friends .
When 's the last time someone said to you , " You got ta hear this , it 's amazing " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a musician, I find this absolutely sickening.
As a human being, I find this absolutely sickening.
Music is special.
It can create or change moods.
It has a major effect on the brain.People used to record and release music because they thought it was good and could make them money.
People who liked music ran those companies.
Today, accountants and MBA's run those companies and you hear what you are getting, much less good music and more crap.
As an old fart, I can tell you music is a lot worse with more crap to sort through to find the few good things to listen to.
CD's are one or two hits and a lot of filler.
The RIAA is a dinosaur and should die quietly.
I used to get excited about new music and so did my friends.
When's the last time someone said to you,"You gotta hear this, it's amazing"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835501</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256227920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny - the PRS in question has, in fact, tried to get mechanic's shops to pay royalties for songs heard from customer radios when their windows are down.</p><p>Curb-stomping is too good for some people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny - the PRS in question has , in fact , tried to get mechanic 's shops to pay royalties for songs heard from customer radios when their windows are down.Curb-stomping is too good for some people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny - the PRS in question has, in fact, tried to get mechanic's shops to pay royalties for songs heard from customer radios when their windows are down.Curb-stomping is too good for some people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832637</id>
	<title>This is why</title>
	<author>Andorin</author>
	<datestamp>1256244600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Creative Commons music is a good thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Creative Commons music is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Creative Commons music is a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834059</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>rotide</author>
	<datestamp>1256219280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what disturbs me.  Playing songs on a personal radio is \_not\_ intended to calm shoppers and aide in business.</p><p>What's next?  Ban iPod's worn by employees because a passerby may just get close enough to make out what song he's listening to?</p><p>If there is a chance to prove a policy is in place to play music for the benefit of the shopper, fine, fair game, but if it is for the sole benefit of a single, or maybe a couple workers to pass the shift, leave them the hell alone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what disturbs me .
Playing songs on a personal radio is \ _not \ _ intended to calm shoppers and aide in business.What 's next ?
Ban iPod 's worn by employees because a passerby may just get close enough to make out what song he 's listening to ? If there is a chance to prove a policy is in place to play music for the benefit of the shopper , fine , fair game , but if it is for the sole benefit of a single , or maybe a couple workers to pass the shift , leave them the hell alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what disturbs me.
Playing songs on a personal radio is \_not\_ intended to calm shoppers and aide in business.What's next?
Ban iPod's worn by employees because a passerby may just get close enough to make out what song he's listening to?If there is a chance to prove a policy is in place to play music for the benefit of the shopper, fine, fair game, but if it is for the sole benefit of a single, or maybe a couple workers to pass the shift, leave them the hell alone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837399</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256236020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nevermind the Bollocks - say it anyway!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind the Bollocks - say it anyway !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind the Bollocks - say it anyway!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256154540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've worked in the past as a musician and songwriter, and I was in radio for most of a decade. I am a published author and editor, and currently make my living as a writer.</p><p>And I say this is utter horseshit.</p><p>People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak. They go there to buy food.</p><p>The radio stations and music services already pay royalties in any case, and places that play recorded music in-house have already paid for those recordings. And that's where it should end.</p><p>To take your model to its logical conclusion is to suggest that, because I can hear some kid's iPod on the train because he's got it cranked up loud enough to turn his brains into jelly, either he or I should pay royalties, which is preposterous. You may claim otherwise, but this is *exactly* where it leads.</p><p>Next, you'll be telling me I should pay a performance fee whenever I read to my daughter from a copyrighted book.</p><p><em>Disclaimer: 'Muzak' and 'iPod' are registered trademarks of their respective owners, and they are completely welcome to them</em>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've worked in the past as a musician and songwriter , and I was in radio for most of a decade .
I am a published author and editor , and currently make my living as a writer.And I say this is utter horseshit.People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak .
They go there to buy food.The radio stations and music services already pay royalties in any case , and places that play recorded music in-house have already paid for those recordings .
And that 's where it should end.To take your model to its logical conclusion is to suggest that , because I can hear some kid 's iPod on the train because he 's got it cranked up loud enough to turn his brains into jelly , either he or I should pay royalties , which is preposterous .
You may claim otherwise , but this is * exactly * where it leads.Next , you 'll be telling me I should pay a performance fee whenever I read to my daughter from a copyrighted book.Disclaimer : 'Muzak ' and 'iPod ' are registered trademarks of their respective owners , and they are completely welcome to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've worked in the past as a musician and songwriter, and I was in radio for most of a decade.
I am a published author and editor, and currently make my living as a writer.And I say this is utter horseshit.People do not go to grocery stores to hear Muzak.
They go there to buy food.The radio stations and music services already pay royalties in any case, and places that play recorded music in-house have already paid for those recordings.
And that's where it should end.To take your model to its logical conclusion is to suggest that, because I can hear some kid's iPod on the train because he's got it cranked up loud enough to turn his brains into jelly, either he or I should pay royalties, which is preposterous.
You may claim otherwise, but this is *exactly* where it leads.Next, you'll be telling me I should pay a performance fee whenever I read to my daughter from a copyrighted book.Disclaimer: 'Muzak' and 'iPod' are registered trademarks of their respective owners, and they are completely welcome to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833925</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, but remember people</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1256218080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guy in store: Nice melons<br>Peter: Hey, watch it!<br>Lois: Peter, I'm holding melons<br>Guy in store: And those hooters aren't bad either<br>Peter: Grrr!<br>Lois: Peter, I'm holding hooters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guy in store : Nice melonsPeter : Hey , watch it ! Lois : Peter , I 'm holding melonsGuy in store : And those hooters are n't bad eitherPeter : Grrr ! Lois : Peter , I 'm holding hooters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guy in store: Nice melonsPeter: Hey, watch it!Lois: Peter, I'm holding melonsGuy in store: And those hooters aren't bad eitherPeter: Grrr!Lois: Peter, I'm holding hooters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256153460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.</i></p><p>Sounded to me like they'd use a radio in the back that just happened to be in earshot of the front.  This is opposed to the full speaker array across the store that keeps the place from being too quiet.</p><p>That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio , but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers , which makes it a tool of commerce.Sounded to me like they 'd use a radio in the back that just happened to be in earshot of the front .
This is opposed to the full speaker array across the store that keeps the place from being too quiet.That 's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone here is going to talk about how outrageous it is for a supermarket to be charged for playing the radio, but the fact of the matter is that they use the radio to create a pleasant environment for their customers, which makes it a tool of commerce.Sounded to me like they'd use a radio in the back that just happened to be in earshot of the front.
This is opposed to the full speaker array across the store that keeps the place from being too quiet.That's more akin to being charged a performance licence for your car radio while your windows are rolled down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833423</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256212380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your arguments leads to nowhere. Libertarian Communism is the only answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your arguments leads to nowhere .
Libertarian Communism is the only answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your arguments leads to nowhere.
Libertarian Communism is the only answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833501</id>
	<title>Re:Brainwashing</title>
	<author>CheshireCatCO</author>
	<datestamp>1256213340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whoa, whoa.  You have songs in your head?</p><p>Did you pay the licensing fee for them?  Lawyers are on their way to you now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whoa , whoa .
You have songs in your head ? Did you pay the licensing fee for them ?
Lawyers are on their way to you now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whoa, whoa.
You have songs in your head?Did you pay the licensing fee for them?
Lawyers are on their way to you now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29839991</id>
	<title>Re:Totally, irrevocably, utterly batshit insane</title>
	<author>Zarf</author>
	<datestamp>1256205180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the off chance you aren't a troll. Here you go:<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs</a> [youtube.com]</p><p><i>I plagarized from that video at 4:51</i></p><p>The supreme court ruled that the ancient doctrine protecting property from the center of the earth into the infinite sky had no place in the modern world. That land owner could *not* charge fees for airplanes to pass over their lands. Similarly in the modern age we live in a world of information where I cannot reasonably expect that if I create a term, word, or idea that I can retain ownership of it.</p><p>The patent is a good thing. Land and property rights are good things. Intellectual property rights are good things. There can be too much of a good thing.</p><p>There must be a reasonable limitation to these rights. Does a comedian have a right to keep you from retelling his joke? It's his intellectual property. He wrote it. If you tell your friends his joke you violate his property.</p><p>I will now affix a term to this post... new and never before seen. The word is: fusboto. Fixed in this medium I now own the term fusboto and shall charge royalties for thinking of the word fusboto.</p><p>Should you quote the term fusboto you are in copyright violation. Nobody may fusboto without written fusboto from fusboto.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the off chance you are n't a troll .
Here you go : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 7Q25-S7jzgs [ youtube.com ] I plagarized from that video at 4 : 51The supreme court ruled that the ancient doctrine protecting property from the center of the earth into the infinite sky had no place in the modern world .
That land owner could * not * charge fees for airplanes to pass over their lands .
Similarly in the modern age we live in a world of information where I can not reasonably expect that if I create a term , word , or idea that I can retain ownership of it.The patent is a good thing .
Land and property rights are good things .
Intellectual property rights are good things .
There can be too much of a good thing.There must be a reasonable limitation to these rights .
Does a comedian have a right to keep you from retelling his joke ?
It 's his intellectual property .
He wrote it .
If you tell your friends his joke you violate his property.I will now affix a term to this post... new and never before seen .
The word is : fusboto .
Fixed in this medium I now own the term fusboto and shall charge royalties for thinking of the word fusboto.Should you quote the term fusboto you are in copyright violation .
Nobody may fusboto without written fusboto from fusboto .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the off chance you aren't a troll.
Here you go:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs [youtube.com]I plagarized from that video at 4:51The supreme court ruled that the ancient doctrine protecting property from the center of the earth into the infinite sky had no place in the modern world.
That land owner could *not* charge fees for airplanes to pass over their lands.
Similarly in the modern age we live in a world of information where I cannot reasonably expect that if I create a term, word, or idea that I can retain ownership of it.The patent is a good thing.
Land and property rights are good things.
Intellectual property rights are good things.
There can be too much of a good thing.There must be a reasonable limitation to these rights.
Does a comedian have a right to keep you from retelling his joke?
It's his intellectual property.
He wrote it.
If you tell your friends his joke you violate his property.I will now affix a term to this post... new and never before seen.
The word is: fusboto.
Fixed in this medium I now own the term fusboto and shall charge royalties for thinking of the word fusboto.Should you quote the term fusboto you are in copyright violation.
Nobody may fusboto without written fusboto from fusboto.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835157</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832287</id>
	<title>I disagree...</title>
	<author>Anachragnome</author>
	<datestamp>1256152320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy"</p><p>It is if you make it yourself.</p><p>Use an acoustic instrument and its "Green" too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy " It is if you make it yourself.Use an acoustic instrument and its " Green " too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We have entered an era where music is no longer an art for all to enjoy"It is if you make it yourself.Use an acoustic instrument and its "Green" too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832819</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>SilentMobius</author>
	<datestamp>1256204040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ASCAP are trying to push just that sort or nonsense. Thankfully they got a bloody nose trying it, but it's indicative of the way they think:</p><p><a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/court-rules-phones-ringing-public-dont-infringe-co" title="eff.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/court-rules-phones-ringing-public-dont-infringe-co</a> [eff.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ASCAP are trying to push just that sort or nonsense .
Thankfully they got a bloody nose trying it , but it 's indicative of the way they think : http : //www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/court-rules-phones-ringing-public-dont-infringe-co [ eff.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ASCAP are trying to push just that sort or nonsense.
Thankfully they got a bloody nose trying it, but it's indicative of the way they think:http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/court-rules-phones-ringing-public-dont-infringe-co [eff.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837637</id>
	<title>O....M.....G...</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1256236920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow. Gov't has failed big time when this happens. Not having the radio on in a store? Not being able to sing a tune while, you know, living - without paying?<br> <br>

Given that the companies who release music want the radio's to play it so it becomes better known so people will want to buy the cds, go to concerts, etc....why would they not want a supermarket to have their music on---- from the radio?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
Gov't has failed big time when this happens .
Not having the radio on in a store ?
Not being able to sing a tune while , you know , living - without paying ?
Given that the companies who release music want the radio 's to play it so it becomes better known so people will want to buy the cds , go to concerts , etc....why would they not want a supermarket to have their music on---- from the radio ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
Gov't has failed big time when this happens.
Not having the radio on in a store?
Not being able to sing a tune while, you know, living - without paying?
Given that the companies who release music want the radio's to play it so it becomes better known so people will want to buy the cds, go to concerts, etc....why would they not want a supermarket to have their music on---- from the radio?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834689</id>
	<title>Next up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256223660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next they will be suing people for washing their hands.</p><p>(To try to prevent the spread of influenza (both H1N1 and seasonal) the department of health is running ads on the radio and tv urging people to wash their hands thoroughly for 20 seconds. "It takes about 20 seconds to sing the Happy Birtthday song twice."</p><p>The happy birthday song is copyrighted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next they will be suing people for washing their hands .
( To try to prevent the spread of influenza ( both H1N1 and seasonal ) the department of health is running ads on the radio and tv urging people to wash their hands thoroughly for 20 seconds .
" It takes about 20 seconds to sing the Happy Birtthday song twice .
" The happy birthday song is copyrighted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next they will be suing people for washing their hands.
(To try to prevent the spread of influenza (both H1N1 and seasonal) the department of health is running ads on the radio and tv urging people to wash their hands thoroughly for 20 seconds.
"It takes about 20 seconds to sing the Happy Birtthday song twice.
"The happy birthday song is copyrighted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781</id>
	<title>kindle text to speech</title>
	<author>angelbunny</author>
	<datestamp>1256203620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hasn't this already happened with the Kindle?</p><p>I admit, I haven't followed the news closely enough under the subject but I believe the text-to-speech feature in the kindle was removed because the MPAA wanted royalties for the feature? Arguably, this is the same situation legally as a teacher reading a book to their class.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has n't this already happened with the Kindle ? I admit , I have n't followed the news closely enough under the subject but I believe the text-to-speech feature in the kindle was removed because the MPAA wanted royalties for the feature ?
Arguably , this is the same situation legally as a teacher reading a book to their class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hasn't this already happened with the Kindle?I admit, I haven't followed the news closely enough under the subject but I believe the text-to-speech feature in the kindle was removed because the MPAA wanted royalties for the feature?
Arguably, this is the same situation legally as a teacher reading a book to their class.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832377</id>
	<title>Death to the soul-sucking capitalist pigs!</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1256153640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems the only balanced and appropriate response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems the only balanced and appropriate response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems the only balanced and appropriate response.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833183</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about you look out for your own interests, screw the opressive PRS that only gives you a dinner per annum, and take steps to find your own audience?</p><p>Put your songs up for free download, print your own CDs using a PoD service, and you'll make more than with PRS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about you look out for your own interests , screw the opressive PRS that only gives you a dinner per annum , and take steps to find your own audience ? Put your songs up for free download , print your own CDs using a PoD service , and you 'll make more than with PRS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about you look out for your own interests, screw the opressive PRS that only gives you a dinner per annum, and take steps to find your own audience?Put your songs up for free download, print your own CDs using a PoD service, and you'll make more than with PRS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963</id>
	<title>I personally welcome the silence!</title>
	<author>KreAture</author>
	<datestamp>1256206260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is something called noise pollution.<br>In todays world we are bombarded with auditory and visual stimuli every waking moment. There is hardly any place where you can just listen to your own pulse as your heart keeps beating or even just nothing.</p><p>Unwanted "music" is classified as noise. After all, wether someone is playing a piano or pushing it down the stairs at 2am would be irrelevant to you unless you happen to be standing in the stairway or own the piano.  Same thing when shopping; You are trying to remember if you need milk or eggs.  You are not interested in who let the dogs out or what Jay-z is doing in Broklyn. You just want to find the damn cereal and go home.</p><p>After finally coming home from a day of intense concentration I don't turn on the radio. I don't turn on the tv. Instead I enjoy some nice, well deserved and for now completely free silence.<br>Try it sometime. When you finally put on your favourite track it sounds much better when your mind is clear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is something called noise pollution.In todays world we are bombarded with auditory and visual stimuli every waking moment .
There is hardly any place where you can just listen to your own pulse as your heart keeps beating or even just nothing.Unwanted " music " is classified as noise .
After all , wether someone is playing a piano or pushing it down the stairs at 2am would be irrelevant to you unless you happen to be standing in the stairway or own the piano .
Same thing when shopping ; You are trying to remember if you need milk or eggs .
You are not interested in who let the dogs out or what Jay-z is doing in Broklyn .
You just want to find the damn cereal and go home.After finally coming home from a day of intense concentration I do n't turn on the radio .
I do n't turn on the tv .
Instead I enjoy some nice , well deserved and for now completely free silence.Try it sometime .
When you finally put on your favourite track it sounds much better when your mind is clear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is something called noise pollution.In todays world we are bombarded with auditory and visual stimuli every waking moment.
There is hardly any place where you can just listen to your own pulse as your heart keeps beating or even just nothing.Unwanted "music" is classified as noise.
After all, wether someone is playing a piano or pushing it down the stairs at 2am would be irrelevant to you unless you happen to be standing in the stairway or own the piano.
Same thing when shopping; You are trying to remember if you need milk or eggs.
You are not interested in who let the dogs out or what Jay-z is doing in Broklyn.
You just want to find the damn cereal and go home.After finally coming home from a day of intense concentration I don't turn on the radio.
I don't turn on the tv.
Instead I enjoy some nice, well deserved and for now completely free silence.Try it sometime.
When you finally put on your favourite track it sounds much better when your mind is clear.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834501</id>
	<title>The solution is...</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1256222220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Sing or play unencumbered songs from independent groups.  The added bonus is that you get to spread the word about indie groups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sing or play unencumbered songs from independent groups .
The added bonus is that you get to spread the word about indie groups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Sing or play unencumbered songs from independent groups.
The added bonus is that you get to spread the word about indie groups.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833595</id>
	<title>Re:Easy solution - Make $$$$ from it.</title>
	<author>zstlaw</author>
	<datestamp>1256215080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of these organizations represent musicians whether or not they would like.  In the US there is no way to opt out of ASCAP and BMI, only sound exchange.  The other organizations represent me whether or not I am registered with them and whether or not I would like them to.  I have to register with them though to collect the fees they charge on my behalf though.  See my earlier post on a club being threatened for letting me play original music there.  Mostly these organizations run on are scare tactics.  I have heard of them backing down several times when fought in court.  Partially because it makes for great print for the local news and most people including judges are completely horrified to hear that local stores are being threatened with thousands of dollars of fees especially when the venue has a good case that the fees are not benefiting any of the musicians playing there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of these organizations represent musicians whether or not they would like .
In the US there is no way to opt out of ASCAP and BMI , only sound exchange .
The other organizations represent me whether or not I am registered with them and whether or not I would like them to .
I have to register with them though to collect the fees they charge on my behalf though .
See my earlier post on a club being threatened for letting me play original music there .
Mostly these organizations run on are scare tactics .
I have heard of them backing down several times when fought in court .
Partially because it makes for great print for the local news and most people including judges are completely horrified to hear that local stores are being threatened with thousands of dollars of fees especially when the venue has a good case that the fees are not benefiting any of the musicians playing there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of these organizations represent musicians whether or not they would like.
In the US there is no way to opt out of ASCAP and BMI, only sound exchange.
The other organizations represent me whether or not I am registered with them and whether or not I would like them to.
I have to register with them though to collect the fees they charge on my behalf though.
See my earlier post on a club being threatened for letting me play original music there.
Mostly these organizations run on are scare tactics.
I have heard of them backing down several times when fought in court.
Partially because it makes for great print for the local news and most people including judges are completely horrified to hear that local stores are being threatened with thousands of dollars of fees especially when the venue has a good case that the fees are not benefiting any of the musicians playing there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832973</id>
	<title>It's on the internets so it must be true!!!1</title>
	<author>Eraesr</author>
	<datestamp>1256206380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah yeah, so what this is a case of is not the PRS being asses that are on an anti-public music witch hunt, it's probably just one of their employees with a serious case of the Monday's. Imagine him being an all-round ass in general, someone that gets a kick out of (imagining) being an authority and he had a rough night, so he took it down on the lady. Let's not make things bigger than they really are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah yeah , so what this is a case of is not the PRS being asses that are on an anti-public music witch hunt , it 's probably just one of their employees with a serious case of the Monday 's .
Imagine him being an all-round ass in general , someone that gets a kick out of ( imagining ) being an authority and he had a rough night , so he took it down on the lady .
Let 's not make things bigger than they really are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah yeah, so what this is a case of is not the PRS being asses that are on an anti-public music witch hunt, it's probably just one of their employees with a serious case of the Monday's.
Imagine him being an all-round ass in general, someone that gets a kick out of (imagining) being an authority and he had a rough night, so he took it down on the lady.
Let's not make things bigger than they really are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834511</id>
	<title>Re:The radio makes senes, but not the singer</title>
	<author>debrisslider</author>
	<datestamp>1256222340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know, just because you use the word 'write' in both 'songwriting' and 'writing software' doesn't mean they are ANYTHING at all alike. Software is a material good that can be objectively valued, music is art and cannot be rationally valued. As you say, when you write a program for someone, specific to the client, they know what they want and how that will benefit them, and your expertise is subject to a cost/benefit analysis - you can create X amount of profit for doing work. Not all songwriting is like that, especially the kind with royalties. Composers are solicited for films and games, jingles are composed for commercial clients - and those artists get paid a salary or a contracted amount, up front. Pop songwriting is a lot more like writing your own program. If you open-source it and give it out free as in beer, then that's one thing, but if you wrote it to try and make money off it, as an independent software developer, then wouldn't you like to be able to charge for it as long as people are willing to pay for it? Should you only get the first months' sales? Should other people be allowed to sell your work for their own profit simply because they have the mechanical ability to? Pop songwriting and the royalties that drive it are a completely different economic beast than getting paid for specific value. <p> Royalties are simply the most rational way of paying songwriters - the ratio of successful songs to unsuccessful songs is so large that it makes no economic sense to do it any other way, and the randomness of the music market prevents any real sort of cost/benefit analysis - even huge stars can flop, one-hit wonders can pay off spectacularly, and you have to take hundreds of risks before you find a profitable performer. A successful artist has to write a large number of unsuccessful songs before they can profit from one, regardless of the relative merit of their work.</p><p> How would you feel if you wrote dozens of good programs, but only got compensated for one if the client hit a improbably large sales target, and you only got a small lump sum anyway? The music industry is a bitch, but it works like it does for a reason, and its crimes are crimes of disproportion rather than inherent evil. </p><p>

It is one thing to rail against abusive organizations, but you have to think about the little guy here. Music as a good is worth what people will pay for it, nothing more and nothing less, it has no inherent value and it is impossible to know in advance just how much it is worth. You have to allow the possibility of profit, however improbable, or the quality of music will decrease even further beyond your lofty standards. Royalties are a merit-driven method of compensation, or as close as we can get allowing for market distortions from publicity campaigns, and are still very relevant (more than ever, in fact) in the post-CD age. Royalties are the only method of compensation that make sense with a lack of scarcity - either through subscription or advertising, royalties can be paid from online radio, with (at least the possibility of) accurate and fair accounting since it is easy to track exactly how many times a song has been heard.</p><p>

And yes, of course people used to get paid for specifically commissioned work, BEFORE THERE WAS RADIO. Royalties have been around as long as modern music has. A patronage system simply doesn't make sense anymore because of the broadness and tastes of the market - you make way more money selling to crowds of teenyboppers or hipsters than to a single customer, and you need the sieve of the market to find talent amongst the millions of musicians producing today. Plenty of terrible work has been commissioned over the centuries as well - think of how many classical composers, or artists of any kind, that you can name from the past 500 or so years, compared to the number of artists you can name from your lifetime. Aside from being completely apples to oranges, there is a serious survivorship bias in comparing the cream of the premodern crop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , just because you use the word 'write ' in both 'songwriting ' and 'writing software ' does n't mean they are ANYTHING at all alike .
Software is a material good that can be objectively valued , music is art and can not be rationally valued .
As you say , when you write a program for someone , specific to the client , they know what they want and how that will benefit them , and your expertise is subject to a cost/benefit analysis - you can create X amount of profit for doing work .
Not all songwriting is like that , especially the kind with royalties .
Composers are solicited for films and games , jingles are composed for commercial clients - and those artists get paid a salary or a contracted amount , up front .
Pop songwriting is a lot more like writing your own program .
If you open-source it and give it out free as in beer , then that 's one thing , but if you wrote it to try and make money off it , as an independent software developer , then would n't you like to be able to charge for it as long as people are willing to pay for it ?
Should you only get the first months ' sales ?
Should other people be allowed to sell your work for their own profit simply because they have the mechanical ability to ?
Pop songwriting and the royalties that drive it are a completely different economic beast than getting paid for specific value .
Royalties are simply the most rational way of paying songwriters - the ratio of successful songs to unsuccessful songs is so large that it makes no economic sense to do it any other way , and the randomness of the music market prevents any real sort of cost/benefit analysis - even huge stars can flop , one-hit wonders can pay off spectacularly , and you have to take hundreds of risks before you find a profitable performer .
A successful artist has to write a large number of unsuccessful songs before they can profit from one , regardless of the relative merit of their work .
How would you feel if you wrote dozens of good programs , but only got compensated for one if the client hit a improbably large sales target , and you only got a small lump sum anyway ?
The music industry is a bitch , but it works like it does for a reason , and its crimes are crimes of disproportion rather than inherent evil .
It is one thing to rail against abusive organizations , but you have to think about the little guy here .
Music as a good is worth what people will pay for it , nothing more and nothing less , it has no inherent value and it is impossible to know in advance just how much it is worth .
You have to allow the possibility of profit , however improbable , or the quality of music will decrease even further beyond your lofty standards .
Royalties are a merit-driven method of compensation , or as close as we can get allowing for market distortions from publicity campaigns , and are still very relevant ( more than ever , in fact ) in the post-CD age .
Royalties are the only method of compensation that make sense with a lack of scarcity - either through subscription or advertising , royalties can be paid from online radio , with ( at least the possibility of ) accurate and fair accounting since it is easy to track exactly how many times a song has been heard .
And yes , of course people used to get paid for specifically commissioned work , BEFORE THERE WAS RADIO .
Royalties have been around as long as modern music has .
A patronage system simply does n't make sense anymore because of the broadness and tastes of the market - you make way more money selling to crowds of teenyboppers or hipsters than to a single customer , and you need the sieve of the market to find talent amongst the millions of musicians producing today .
Plenty of terrible work has been commissioned over the centuries as well - think of how many classical composers , or artists of any kind , that you can name from the past 500 or so years , compared to the number of artists you can name from your lifetime .
Aside from being completely apples to oranges , there is a serious survivorship bias in comparing the cream of the premodern crop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, just because you use the word 'write' in both 'songwriting' and 'writing software' doesn't mean they are ANYTHING at all alike.
Software is a material good that can be objectively valued, music is art and cannot be rationally valued.
As you say, when you write a program for someone, specific to the client, they know what they want and how that will benefit them, and your expertise is subject to a cost/benefit analysis - you can create X amount of profit for doing work.
Not all songwriting is like that, especially the kind with royalties.
Composers are solicited for films and games, jingles are composed for commercial clients - and those artists get paid a salary or a contracted amount, up front.
Pop songwriting is a lot more like writing your own program.
If you open-source it and give it out free as in beer, then that's one thing, but if you wrote it to try and make money off it, as an independent software developer, then wouldn't you like to be able to charge for it as long as people are willing to pay for it?
Should you only get the first months' sales?
Should other people be allowed to sell your work for their own profit simply because they have the mechanical ability to?
Pop songwriting and the royalties that drive it are a completely different economic beast than getting paid for specific value.
Royalties are simply the most rational way of paying songwriters - the ratio of successful songs to unsuccessful songs is so large that it makes no economic sense to do it any other way, and the randomness of the music market prevents any real sort of cost/benefit analysis - even huge stars can flop, one-hit wonders can pay off spectacularly, and you have to take hundreds of risks before you find a profitable performer.
A successful artist has to write a large number of unsuccessful songs before they can profit from one, regardless of the relative merit of their work.
How would you feel if you wrote dozens of good programs, but only got compensated for one if the client hit a improbably large sales target, and you only got a small lump sum anyway?
The music industry is a bitch, but it works like it does for a reason, and its crimes are crimes of disproportion rather than inherent evil.
It is one thing to rail against abusive organizations, but you have to think about the little guy here.
Music as a good is worth what people will pay for it, nothing more and nothing less, it has no inherent value and it is impossible to know in advance just how much it is worth.
You have to allow the possibility of profit, however improbable, or the quality of music will decrease even further beyond your lofty standards.
Royalties are a merit-driven method of compensation, or as close as we can get allowing for market distortions from publicity campaigns, and are still very relevant (more than ever, in fact) in the post-CD age.
Royalties are the only method of compensation that make sense with a lack of scarcity - either through subscription or advertising, royalties can be paid from online radio, with (at least the possibility of) accurate and fair accounting since it is easy to track exactly how many times a song has been heard.
And yes, of course people used to get paid for specifically commissioned work, BEFORE THERE WAS RADIO.
Royalties have been around as long as modern music has.
A patronage system simply doesn't make sense anymore because of the broadness and tastes of the market - you make way more money selling to crowds of teenyboppers or hipsters than to a single customer, and you need the sieve of the market to find talent amongst the millions of musicians producing today.
Plenty of terrible work has been commissioned over the centuries as well - think of how many classical composers, or artists of any kind, that you can name from the past 500 or so years, compared to the number of artists you can name from your lifetime.
Aside from being completely apples to oranges, there is a serious survivorship bias in comparing the cream of the premodern crop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834077</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256219340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course those same songwriters never copied anything from anyone before them.  No, they would never do that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course those same songwriters never copied anything from anyone before them .
No , they would never do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course those same songwriters never copied anything from anyone before them.
No, they would never do that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837669</id>
	<title>Re:Hoax</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1256237040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hell, it doesn't even have to be a halfway legit-sounding press release. Send them the fake Stella stories or a scare PR on dihydrogen monoxide. Ten to one if it <em>looks</em> halfway legit (presentation, not content) it gets published, even if its content is complete BS...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , it does n't even have to be a halfway legit-sounding press release .
Send them the fake Stella stories or a scare PR on dihydrogen monoxide .
Ten to one if it looks halfway legit ( presentation , not content ) it gets published , even if its content is complete BS.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, it doesn't even have to be a halfway legit-sounding press release.
Send them the fake Stella stories or a scare PR on dihydrogen monoxide.
Ten to one if it looks halfway legit (presentation, not content) it gets published, even if its content is complete BS...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834367
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832503
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840273
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836257
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832499
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834485
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833393
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832541
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837399
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833497
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832497
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834177
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834969
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834059
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834119
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833725
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834031
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833145
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832607
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832449
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837945
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837255
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29853583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843085
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834897
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29844489
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833481
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833265
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837583
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_2319200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834403
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835157
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29839991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832541
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836221
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833145
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837669
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833557
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834083
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832597
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832225
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832451
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832449
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832503
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832531
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833403
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837555
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832845
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842885
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833497
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832773
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838127
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832397
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833805
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832651
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832923
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833633
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837279
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833393
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832309
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837035
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841309
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29842761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834969
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832701
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837399
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835271
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29846123
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832257
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832809
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29853583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840629
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832291
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834485
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836405
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837877
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832287
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837339
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29843281
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837761
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836243
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833487
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832497
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834403
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835157
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29839991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833841
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834537
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836249
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837065
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833105
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832973
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29841637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832909
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29838315
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837583
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836565
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833265
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832429
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833187
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837255
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832485
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836257
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834511
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833017
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836215
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835583
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833725
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833183
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832433
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833785
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832819
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835811
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833481
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832699
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834177
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837607
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834103
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832475
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833745
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832473
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833655
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29840883
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833657
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29836479
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29844489
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832367
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834059
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834281
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837369
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29835501
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29833159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29832267
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29837605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_2319200.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_2319200.29834271
</commentlist>
</conversation>
