<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_28_1344203</id>
	<title>"Three Strikes" To Go Ahead In Britain</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256739180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://notnews.today.com/" rel="nofollow">David Gerard</a> writes <i>"Lord Peter Mandelson has carefully ignored the <a href="//news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/07/0017230&amp;tid=513">Gowers Report</a> and the <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/08/2315241&amp;tid=94">Carter Report</a>, instead taking the advice of his good friend David Geffen and announcing that '<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/28/mandelson-date-blocking-filesharers-connections">three strikes and you're out</a>' will become law in Britain. The Open Rights Group has, of course, <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2009/mandelson-gives-go-ahead-to-three-strikes">hit the roof</a>. Oh, and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that <a href="https://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/27/1833206/UK-Law-Enforcement-Is-Against-3-Strikes">widespread encryption will become normal</a>, hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities. Still, worth it to <a href="http://notnews.today.com/?p=705">stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared</a>, right?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>David Gerard writes " Lord Peter Mandelson has carefully ignored the Gowers Report and the Carter Report , instead taking the advice of his good friend David Geffen and announcing that 'three strikes and you 're out ' will become law in Britain .
The Open Rights Group has , of course , hit the roof .
Oh , and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that widespread encryption will become normal , hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities .
Still , worth it to stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared , right ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>David Gerard writes "Lord Peter Mandelson has carefully ignored the Gowers Report and the Carter Report, instead taking the advice of his good friend David Geffen and announcing that 'three strikes and you're out' will become law in Britain.
The Open Rights Group has, of course, hit the roof.
Oh, and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that widespread encryption will become normal, hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities.
Still, worth it to stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared, right?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901503</id>
	<title>The Lords won't approve this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256762220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The house of Lords will not approve this bill because it goes directly against information brought to light in the digital Britain report, is against the advice of British intelligence agencies and also the Police.</p><p>Trying to set unpopular policy and laws into motion like this, so close to an election is political suicide.<br>This will be the final straw to break the "Camel's back" So to speak as far as re-election is concerned.</p><p>I live in England and this bill simply means another stealth tax, which no one can afford to pay because the recession is already stretching everyone.</p><p>I don't share any copyrighted content over the internet. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The house of Lords will not approve this bill because it goes directly against information brought to light in the digital Britain report , is against the advice of British intelligence agencies and also the Police.Trying to set unpopular policy and laws into motion like this , so close to an election is political suicide.This will be the final straw to break the " Camel 's back " So to speak as far as re-election is concerned.I live in England and this bill simply means another stealth tax , which no one can afford to pay because the recession is already stretching everyone.I do n't share any copyrighted content over the internet .
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The house of Lords will not approve this bill because it goes directly against information brought to light in the digital Britain report, is against the advice of British intelligence agencies and also the Police.Trying to set unpopular policy and laws into motion like this, so close to an election is political suicide.This will be the final straw to break the "Camel's back" So to speak as far as re-election is concerned.I live in England and this bill simply means another stealth tax, which no one can afford to pay because the recession is already stretching everyone.I don't share any copyrighted content over the internet.
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897385</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>pastafazou</author>
	<datestamp>1256745000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>cutting a politician off from the internet is like banning blind people from driving.</htmltext>
<tokenext>cutting a politician off from the internet is like banning blind people from driving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cutting a politician off from the internet is like banning blind people from driving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898371</id>
	<title>Simple Solution</title>
	<author>Bob9113</author>
	<datestamp>1256749020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Oh, and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that widespread encryption will become normal, hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities.</i></p><p>If that's the only objection from accredited members of the oligarchy, it's easy to fix. Just require all encryption to use published certs from approved corporations. Then you can apply the three strikes law to anyone who is using encryption for evil purposes, like doing anything other than shopping at approved online merchants. Frankly, if you're not using the Internet to give your money back to the accredited members of the regime, you're probably a terrorist anyway. I don't see why we would want to cripple our ability to channel additional money to the senior establishments in the oligarchy in order to let terrorists use the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that widespread encryption will become normal , hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities.If that 's the only objection from accredited members of the oligarchy , it 's easy to fix .
Just require all encryption to use published certs from approved corporations .
Then you can apply the three strikes law to anyone who is using encryption for evil purposes , like doing anything other than shopping at approved online merchants .
Frankly , if you 're not using the Internet to give your money back to the accredited members of the regime , you 're probably a terrorist anyway .
I do n't see why we would want to cripple our ability to channel additional money to the senior establishments in the oligarchy in order to let terrorists use the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and never mind MI5 and the police pointing out that widespread encryption will become normal, hampering their efforts to keep up with little things like impending terrorist atrocities.If that's the only objection from accredited members of the oligarchy, it's easy to fix.
Just require all encryption to use published certs from approved corporations.
Then you can apply the three strikes law to anyone who is using encryption for evil purposes, like doing anything other than shopping at approved online merchants.
Frankly, if you're not using the Internet to give your money back to the accredited members of the regime, you're probably a terrorist anyway.
I don't see why we would want to cripple our ability to channel additional money to the senior establishments in the oligarchy in order to let terrorists use the Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898151</id>
	<title>not again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256748060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rear shafted by the UK Labour Government again...Bring on the General election...time to show these twats that we have had enough.</p><p>I did contact my MP, but seeing as he is standing down at the next General election due to the expenses scandal I ain't holding my breath...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rear shafted by the UK Labour Government again...Bring on the General election...time to show these twats that we have had enough.I did contact my MP , but seeing as he is standing down at the next General election due to the expenses scandal I ai n't holding my breath.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rear shafted by the UK Labour Government again...Bring on the General election...time to show these twats that we have had enough.I did contact my MP, but seeing as he is standing down at the next General election due to the expenses scandal I ain't holding my breath...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902319</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone pirate Lily Allen anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256722800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I keep downloading it, over and over, in an attempt to bankrupt the recording industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I keep downloading it , over and over , in an attempt to bankrupt the recording industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I keep downloading it, over and over, in an attempt to bankrupt the recording industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903603</id>
	<title>Re:New rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256729460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law. A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner, and gets banned from government after three strikes.</p></div><p>How about: a polititian gets a strike for declaring that mortgage on his second home in london is wholly exclusively, and unavoidably for the good of his constituants?</p><p>3 strikes and you're disconnected from the global financial economy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law .
A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner , and gets banned from government after three strikes.How about : a polititian gets a strike for declaring that mortgage on his second home in london is wholly exclusively , and unavoidably for the good of his constituants ? 3 strikes and you 're disconnected from the global financial economy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law.
A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner, and gets banned from government after three strikes.How about: a polititian gets a strike for declaring that mortgage on his second home in london is wholly exclusively, and unavoidably for the good of his constituants?3 strikes and you're disconnected from the global financial economy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900629</id>
	<title>Re:Three Strikes on /.</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1256758200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why 3? What's so magic about "3" that it's okay to do it twice, but a third time is just too much and should be punished. Why not a 4 strikes law, or 2 strikes? And if it's a reference to baseball, why not use references to other sports instead? Turn it into an icehockey-themed "timeout" law, a soccer-themed "yellow cards" law or a boxing-themed "knockout" law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why 3 ?
What 's so magic about " 3 " that it 's okay to do it twice , but a third time is just too much and should be punished .
Why not a 4 strikes law , or 2 strikes ?
And if it 's a reference to baseball , why not use references to other sports instead ?
Turn it into an icehockey-themed " timeout " law , a soccer-themed " yellow cards " law or a boxing-themed " knockout " law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why 3?
What's so magic about "3" that it's okay to do it twice, but a third time is just too much and should be punished.
Why not a 4 strikes law, or 2 strikes?
And if it's a reference to baseball, why not use references to other sports instead?
Turn it into an icehockey-themed "timeout" law, a soccer-themed "yellow cards" law or a boxing-themed "knockout" law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263</id>
	<title>Hey Britons</title>
	<author>parlancex</author>
	<datestamp>1256744520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thanks for allowing this to happen. I expect it will be only a few months before someone stands up in Canadian parliament to make a speech that includes the phrase "3 strikes laws have already been enacted in other nations, such as Britain...". There comes a point where you should realize that angry letters aren't going to get it done, you're going to have to accept your responsibility to <b>take more aggressive action</b> when your government does not stand up for its people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for allowing this to happen .
I expect it will be only a few months before someone stands up in Canadian parliament to make a speech that includes the phrase " 3 strikes laws have already been enacted in other nations , such as Britain... " .
There comes a point where you should realize that angry letters are n't going to get it done , you 're going to have to accept your responsibility to take more aggressive action when your government does not stand up for its people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for allowing this to happen.
I expect it will be only a few months before someone stands up in Canadian parliament to make a speech that includes the phrase "3 strikes laws have already been enacted in other nations, such as Britain...".
There comes a point where you should realize that angry letters aren't going to get it done, you're going to have to accept your responsibility to take more aggressive action when your government does not stand up for its people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897523</id>
	<title>Re:Hey Britons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256745540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These things seem like they're only a matter of time. Everyone thought this was dead in France when ruled unconstitutional, then a week or two ago it was suddenly opened again. Sheer persistence ends up getting these things passed, regardless of the opposition and regardless of due process. It's almost inevitable.</p><p>In other words, politicians do what they want to do (or what other people convince them they want to do), whether or not it serves the interest of their constituents. And they'll keep trying until they get what they want. That persistence is probably one of the traits that got them elected in the first place, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These things seem like they 're only a matter of time .
Everyone thought this was dead in France when ruled unconstitutional , then a week or two ago it was suddenly opened again .
Sheer persistence ends up getting these things passed , regardless of the opposition and regardless of due process .
It 's almost inevitable.In other words , politicians do what they want to do ( or what other people convince them they want to do ) , whether or not it serves the interest of their constituents .
And they 'll keep trying until they get what they want .
That persistence is probably one of the traits that got them elected in the first place , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These things seem like they're only a matter of time.
Everyone thought this was dead in France when ruled unconstitutional, then a week or two ago it was suddenly opened again.
Sheer persistence ends up getting these things passed, regardless of the opposition and regardless of due process.
It's almost inevitable.In other words, politicians do what they want to do (or what other people convince them they want to do), whether or not it serves the interest of their constituents.
And they'll keep trying until they get what they want.
That persistence is probably one of the traits that got them elected in the first place, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900763</id>
	<title>Re:TOR</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1256758860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Academically, it's done, it just needs sufficient incentive for users to switch.  How to create effective P2P networks is an interesting area of academic research, and there's been quite a lot done on it over the last few years (eMule and BitTorrent both started life as academic works).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Academically , it 's done , it just needs sufficient incentive for users to switch .
How to create effective P2P networks is an interesting area of academic research , and there 's been quite a lot done on it over the last few years ( eMule and BitTorrent both started life as academic works ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Academically, it's done, it just needs sufficient incentive for users to switch.
How to create effective P2P networks is an interesting area of academic research, and there's been quite a lot done on it over the last few years (eMule and BitTorrent both started life as academic works).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29921205</id>
	<title>Brits!</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1256933460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you ever seen a vid called V for Vendetta - I mean<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Cameras everywhere - people being disgraced (and more) for pointing out inconvenient truths... Ah hem - i think it may be time to snap out of it before it's too late.
<br> <br>
Hope everything else is well. <br> <br>

Best Wishes!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever seen a vid called V for Vendetta - I mean ...Cameras everywhere - people being disgraced ( and more ) for pointing out inconvenient truths... Ah hem - i think it may be time to snap out of it before it 's too late .
Hope everything else is well .
Best Wishes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever seen a vid called V for Vendetta - I mean ...Cameras everywhere - people being disgraced (and more) for pointing out inconvenient truths... Ah hem - i think it may be time to snap out of it before it's too late.
Hope everything else is well.
Best Wishes!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905759</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't feel bad, if you come from a non-commonwealth country. I once tried to explain test cricket to a German friend, while we watched it on TV, and after more than an hour he was still non the wiser. He did like the bit where the fast bowler hit a batsman on the head though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't feel bad , if you come from a non-commonwealth country .
I once tried to explain test cricket to a German friend , while we watched it on TV , and after more than an hour he was still non the wiser .
He did like the bit where the fast bowler hit a batsman on the head though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't feel bad, if you come from a non-commonwealth country.
I once tried to explain test cricket to a German friend, while we watched it on TV, and after more than an hour he was still non the wiser.
He did like the bit where the fast bowler hit a batsman on the head though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902953</id>
	<title>Wont work</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1256726220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only group that will be allowed to 'accuse' will be the media, and why would they incriminate their own paid for law makers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only group that will be allowed to 'accuse ' will be the media , and why would they incriminate their own paid for law makers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only group that will be allowed to 'accuse' will be the media, and why would they incriminate their own paid for law makers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201</id>
	<title>Mandelson is waiting for his third strike</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, serial resigner, unelected jobsworth, and general insult to the democratic process "Lord" Peter Mandelson, having been appointed to high government office on a technicality by serial bad decision maker, unelected jobsworth, and general insult to the democractic process Gordon Brown, will shortly be resigning, again, having demonstrated a stunning lack of competence in public office, again.</p><p>Sorry, we've got an update: the Labour Party are going to get hammered so badly in the general election next year that they might actually come third, the current administration is already in lame duck mode, and Mandelson's views are all but irrelevant.</p><p>Frankly, I'm more worried about what David Cameron and his crew are going to do when they get in. If memory serves, they have publicly backed screwing the people in favour of Big Media pretty much any time the question has come up, also directly contravening overwhelming public sentiment expressed to Gowers et al.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , serial resigner , unelected jobsworth , and general insult to the democratic process " Lord " Peter Mandelson , having been appointed to high government office on a technicality by serial bad decision maker , unelected jobsworth , and general insult to the democractic process Gordon Brown , will shortly be resigning , again , having demonstrated a stunning lack of competence in public office , again.Sorry , we 've got an update : the Labour Party are going to get hammered so badly in the general election next year that they might actually come third , the current administration is already in lame duck mode , and Mandelson 's views are all but irrelevant.Frankly , I 'm more worried about what David Cameron and his crew are going to do when they get in .
If memory serves , they have publicly backed screwing the people in favour of Big Media pretty much any time the question has come up , also directly contravening overwhelming public sentiment expressed to Gowers et al .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, serial resigner, unelected jobsworth, and general insult to the democratic process "Lord" Peter Mandelson, having been appointed to high government office on a technicality by serial bad decision maker, unelected jobsworth, and general insult to the democractic process Gordon Brown, will shortly be resigning, again, having demonstrated a stunning lack of competence in public office, again.Sorry, we've got an update: the Labour Party are going to get hammered so badly in the general election next year that they might actually come third, the current administration is already in lame duck mode, and Mandelson's views are all but irrelevant.Frankly, I'm more worried about what David Cameron and his crew are going to do when they get in.
If memory serves, they have publicly backed screwing the people in favour of Big Media pretty much any time the question has come up, also directly contravening overwhelming public sentiment expressed to Gowers et al.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900497</id>
	<title>USA will be next</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1256757780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a reminder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a reminder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a reminder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897401</id>
	<title>Re:Whoever wrote TFS is retarded</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256745120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>err... TFS mirrors TFA... not that you read it or anything...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>err... TFS mirrors TFA... not that you read it or anything.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>err... TFS mirrors TFA... not that you read it or anything...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897215</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898123</id>
	<title>One more reason why Labour will not be re-elected</title>
	<author>tebee</author>
	<datestamp>1256747940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't help wondering why it has not occurred to this government, that if there are as many filesharers as they say, then being nasty to them is not going to exactly encourage them to vote Labour at the next election.
<p>

Obviously a Government with a suicide wish.

</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't help wondering why it has not occurred to this government , that if there are as many filesharers as they say , then being nasty to them is not going to exactly encourage them to vote Labour at the next election .
Obviously a Government with a suicide wish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't help wondering why it has not occurred to this government, that if there are as many filesharers as they say, then being nasty to them is not going to exactly encourage them to vote Labour at the next election.
Obviously a Government with a suicide wish.

</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897415</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1256745120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely.</p><p>Whilst mentioning encryption causes people to post that f'ing cartoon with the $5 wrench adnauseum, the fact is, even fairly weak encryption whilst data transits though your ISP goes a long long way.</p><p>For example, a certain bone-headed ISP which one of my relatives uses, enforces using their outgoing mail server for "anti-spam reasons".<br>Do they log <b>all</b> outgoing emails? You can bet they do. SMTP over SSL raises the bar just high enough that they don't bother any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely.Whilst mentioning encryption causes people to post that f'ing cartoon with the $ 5 wrench adnauseum , the fact is , even fairly weak encryption whilst data transits though your ISP goes a long long way.For example , a certain bone-headed ISP which one of my relatives uses , enforces using their outgoing mail server for " anti-spam reasons " .Do they log all outgoing emails ?
You can bet they do .
SMTP over SSL raises the bar just high enough that they do n't bother any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.Whilst mentioning encryption causes people to post that f'ing cartoon with the $5 wrench adnauseum, the fact is, even fairly weak encryption whilst data transits though your ISP goes a long long way.For example, a certain bone-headed ISP which one of my relatives uses, enforces using their outgoing mail server for "anti-spam reasons".Do they log all outgoing emails?
You can bet they do.
SMTP over SSL raises the bar just high enough that they don't bother any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897383</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256745000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh ho ho. Contrary to popular belief most of us don't really care about cricket, football (soccer) is the national sport.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh ho ho .
Contrary to popular belief most of us do n't really care about cricket , football ( soccer ) is the national sport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh ho ho.
Contrary to popular belief most of us don't really care about cricket, football (soccer) is the national sport.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908211</id>
	<title>Re:Mandelson is waiting for his third strike</title>
	<author>JAlexoi</author>
	<datestamp>1256816700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FFS Brits. Do us all a favour, just draft a constitution that ban those unelected sponges from holding offices. You do know, that you don't have that most simple defining document? Is there anything your parliament can't pass as a law?<br>
In the words of David Mitchell: You don't take active interest in how your country is run for 40 years, and look what happens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FFS Brits .
Do us all a favour , just draft a constitution that ban those unelected sponges from holding offices .
You do know , that you do n't have that most simple defining document ?
Is there anything your parliament ca n't pass as a law ?
In the words of David Mitchell : You do n't take active interest in how your country is run for 40 years , and look what happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FFS Brits.
Do us all a favour, just draft a constitution that ban those unelected sponges from holding offices.
You do know, that you don't have that most simple defining document?
Is there anything your parliament can't pass as a law?
In the words of David Mitchell: You don't take active interest in how your country is run for 40 years, and look what happens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901025</id>
	<title>Frankie Boyle on Mandelson</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1256759940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-NAZcgHNoA" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-NAZcgHNoA</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>Some light relief.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = J-NAZcgHNoA [ youtube.com ] Some light relief .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-NAZcgHNoA [youtube.com]Some light relief.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899029</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>Homburg</author>
	<datestamp>1256751960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If by "never" you mean "since the 13th century."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If by " never " you mean " since the 13th century .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If by "never" you mean "since the 13th century.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898403</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously, write to them</title>
	<author>daybot</author>
	<datestamp>1256749140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Me too. I was going to paste my letter here, but since I have sent it now, I am frightened of peer review<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Me too .
I was going to paste my letter here , but since I have sent it now , I am frightened of peer review : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Me too.
I was going to paste my letter here, but since I have sent it now, I am frightened of peer review :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897239</id>
	<title>So I can ban anyone I want?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean I can declare any content I want my copyright and accuse anyone I want of stealng it until they get cut off without anyone looking over my shoulder?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean I can declare any content I want my copyright and accuse anyone I want of stealng it until they get cut off without anyone looking over my shoulder ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean I can declare any content I want my copyright and accuse anyone I want of stealng it until they get cut off without anyone looking over my shoulder?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900685</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>Mia'cova</author>
	<datestamp>1256758500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded."</p><p>No clue how you got +5 insightful. Of course encryption impede those tasks. How exactly does a wiretap do any good when the traffic is encrypted.</p><p>"In fact, draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever"</p><p>Draconian enforcement is horrible. It greatly abuses the users and infringes on their rights/privacy. Nothing you say makes any sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" For legitimate law enforcement needs , search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded .
" No clue how you got + 5 insightful .
Of course encryption impede those tasks .
How exactly does a wiretap do any good when the traffic is encrypted .
" In fact , draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever " Draconian enforcement is horrible .
It greatly abuses the users and infringes on their rights/privacy .
Nothing you say makes any sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.
"No clue how you got +5 insightful.
Of course encryption impede those tasks.
How exactly does a wiretap do any good when the traffic is encrypted.
"In fact, draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever"Draconian enforcement is horrible.
It greatly abuses the users and infringes on their rights/privacy.
Nothing you say makes any sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898189</id>
	<title>Re:Why would P2P switch to encryption?</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1256748240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With encryption, they cannot see whether you are illegally sharing copyrighted material or transferring legal data. And I guess even with current legislation, "they have copied a large amount of data, but we have no clue what it was" would not be enough for legal action. Of course if the site they connected to contained <em>only</em> illegal content, it would probably enough. However, it probably isn't too hard to also put up torrents for all sorts of free material (Open Source material, Creative Commons stuff, etc.) besides the illegal stuff.</p><p>Another option would be to combine cryptography with steganography. Hide the encrypted illegal material inside larger, legal material. I think if done right, unless you know the password to decrypt, you shouldn't even have a chance to detect that there <em>is</em> encrypted material inside (but then, I'm not an expert in cryptography or steganography). The disadvantage of that method is, of course, that your files would have to get much larger (AFAIU it has to offer enough noise to be replaced by your data).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With encryption , they can not see whether you are illegally sharing copyrighted material or transferring legal data .
And I guess even with current legislation , " they have copied a large amount of data , but we have no clue what it was " would not be enough for legal action .
Of course if the site they connected to contained only illegal content , it would probably enough .
However , it probably is n't too hard to also put up torrents for all sorts of free material ( Open Source material , Creative Commons stuff , etc .
) besides the illegal stuff.Another option would be to combine cryptography with steganography .
Hide the encrypted illegal material inside larger , legal material .
I think if done right , unless you know the password to decrypt , you should n't even have a chance to detect that there is encrypted material inside ( but then , I 'm not an expert in cryptography or steganography ) .
The disadvantage of that method is , of course , that your files would have to get much larger ( AFAIU it has to offer enough noise to be replaced by your data ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With encryption, they cannot see whether you are illegally sharing copyrighted material or transferring legal data.
And I guess even with current legislation, "they have copied a large amount of data, but we have no clue what it was" would not be enough for legal action.
Of course if the site they connected to contained only illegal content, it would probably enough.
However, it probably isn't too hard to also put up torrents for all sorts of free material (Open Source material, Creative Commons stuff, etc.
) besides the illegal stuff.Another option would be to combine cryptography with steganography.
Hide the encrypted illegal material inside larger, legal material.
I think if done right, unless you know the password to decrypt, you shouldn't even have a chance to detect that there is encrypted material inside (but then, I'm not an expert in cryptography or steganography).
The disadvantage of that method is, of course, that your files would have to get much larger (AFAIU it has to offer enough noise to be replaced by your data).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898479</id>
	<title>David Geffen?  Feh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256749500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This would of course be the same David Geffen who spent a quarter of a century trying to keep the unwashed masses from using the publicly-owned beach in front of his house in Malibu.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This would of course be the same David Geffen who spent a quarter of a century trying to keep the unwashed masses from using the publicly-owned beach in front of his house in Malibu .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would of course be the same David Geffen who spent a quarter of a century trying to keep the unwashed masses from using the publicly-owned beach in front of his house in Malibu.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897215</id>
	<title>Whoever wrote TFS is retarded</title>
	<author>thisnamestoolong</author>
	<datestamp>1256744340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They start off good, railing against the absurd 3 strikes law, but then continue on to rail against encryption as hampering the ability of law enforcement to fight terrorism? It seems you missed the grape Kool-Aid, but ended up drinking the blue raspberry just the same...</htmltext>
<tokenext>They start off good , railing against the absurd 3 strikes law , but then continue on to rail against encryption as hampering the ability of law enforcement to fight terrorism ?
It seems you missed the grape Kool-Aid , but ended up drinking the blue raspberry just the same.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They start off good, railing against the absurd 3 strikes law, but then continue on to rail against encryption as hampering the ability of law enforcement to fight terrorism?
It seems you missed the grape Kool-Aid, but ended up drinking the blue raspberry just the same...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902345</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone pirate Lily Allen anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256722920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parliament isn't doing enough to prevent people being exposed to Lilly Allen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parliament is n't doing enough to prevent people being exposed to Lilly Allen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parliament isn't doing enough to prevent people being exposed to Lilly Allen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897193</id>
	<title>I don't mind this....</title>
	<author>yargnad</author>
	<datestamp>1256744220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>as long as I can still find nude pics of Lily Allen on google images.</htmltext>
<tokenext>as long as I can still find nude pics of Lily Allen on google images .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as long as I can still find nude pics of Lily Allen on google images.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908137</id>
	<title>No evidence, charge or trial</title>
	<author>dugeen</author>
	<datestamp>1256815380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's how New Labour like to do things. If the accused in these cases actually got a fair trial in a properly constituted court, it might be possible to see some faint gleam of sense in this idea. But no.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's how New Labour like to do things .
If the accused in these cases actually got a fair trial in a properly constituted court , it might be possible to see some faint gleam of sense in this idea .
But no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's how New Labour like to do things.
If the accused in these cases actually got a fair trial in a properly constituted court, it might be possible to see some faint gleam of sense in this idea.
But no.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897423</id>
	<title>Dear Lily Allen,</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1256745180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = HL9-esIM2CY [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898041</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>Thanshin</author>
	<datestamp>1256747580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The UK! Nice.</p><p>If it had started on a computer wise under-developped country. All it's population would have to wait until the law reached the UK, France, USA, etc. to have any chance of a working full network encryption.</p><p>Anyway, as I've often stated in slashdot, the arms race will keep going, and the corporation lobbied laws will fail to keep up with the technologists.</p><p>In little more than a decade the americans will start a war on piracy that will work about as well as the current unwinnable wars. i.e.: A secure, illegal, connection will cost several times more than it's lawful price and a huge percentage of the population will pay them and access the contents anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The UK !
Nice.If it had started on a computer wise under-developped country .
All it 's population would have to wait until the law reached the UK , France , USA , etc .
to have any chance of a working full network encryption.Anyway , as I 've often stated in slashdot , the arms race will keep going , and the corporation lobbied laws will fail to keep up with the technologists.In little more than a decade the americans will start a war on piracy that will work about as well as the current unwinnable wars .
i.e. : A secure , illegal , connection will cost several times more than it 's lawful price and a huge percentage of the population will pay them and access the contents anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The UK!
Nice.If it had started on a computer wise under-developped country.
All it's population would have to wait until the law reached the UK, France, USA, etc.
to have any chance of a working full network encryption.Anyway, as I've often stated in slashdot, the arms race will keep going, and the corporation lobbied laws will fail to keep up with the technologists.In little more than a decade the americans will start a war on piracy that will work about as well as the current unwinnable wars.
i.e.: A secure, illegal, connection will cost several times more than it's lawful price and a huge percentage of the population will pay them and access the contents anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898693</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Davey McDave</author>
	<datestamp>1256750520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Believe it or not, we know what baseball is in the UK and how it works. It was derived from Rounders which is very popular with school children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Believe it or not , we know what baseball is in the UK and how it works .
It was derived from Rounders which is very popular with school children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Believe it or not, we know what baseball is in the UK and how it works.
It was derived from Rounders which is very popular with school children.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907497</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256847780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Rules of Cricket:


You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he is out. When they are all out, the side that's been out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out, he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who are all out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Rules of Cricket : You have two sides , one out in the field and one in .
Each man that 's in goes out , and when he 's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he is out .
When they are all out , the side that 's been out comes in and the side that 's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in , out .
Sometimes you get men still in and not out .
When a man goes out to go in , the men who are out try to get him out , and when he is out , he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in .
There are two men called umpires who are all out all the time , and they decide when the men who are in are out .
When both sides have been in and all the men have been out , and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in , including those who are not out , that is the end of the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Rules of Cricket:


You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he is out.
When they are all out, the side that's been out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out.
Sometimes you get men still in and not out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out, he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
There are two men called umpires who are all out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
When both sides have been in and all the men have been out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896903</id>
	<title>Agreed - ban encryption.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed - ban encryption.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed - ban encryption .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed - ban encryption.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898879</id>
	<title>Free filesharing</title>
	<author>zoeblade</author>
	<datestamp>1256751300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're in the UK and you want to show politicians you're against this, feel free to <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/freefilesharing/" title="number10.gov.uk">sign a petition saying so</a> [number10.gov.uk].  Thank you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in the UK and you want to show politicians you 're against this , feel free to sign a petition saying so [ number10.gov.uk ] .
Thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in the UK and you want to show politicians you're against this, feel free to sign a petition saying so [number10.gov.uk].
Thank you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29929937</id>
	<title>Textual Changes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes that<br>companies force book purchasers to identify themselves, so the company<br>knows what books any person has bought.  This is what Amazon does now,<br>and it is dangerous in itself.</p><p>See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle<br>("Kindle") is bad for your freedom.</p><p>- RMS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes thatcompanies force book purchasers to identify themselves , so the companyknows what books any person has bought .
This is what Amazon does now,and it is dangerous in itself.See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle ( " Kindle " ) is bad for your freedom.- RMS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes thatcompanies force book purchasers to identify themselves, so the companyknows what books any person has bought.
This is what Amazon does now,and it is dangerous in itself.See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle("Kindle") is bad for your freedom.- RMS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907123</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>ryzvonusef</author>
	<datestamp>1256757120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The closest we have to that concept is perhaps the Hat-trick <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat-trick#Cricket" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat-trick#Cricket</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The closest we have to that concept is perhaps the Hat-trick http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat-trick # Cricket [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The closest we have to that concept is perhaps the Hat-trick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hat-trick#Cricket [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898211</id>
	<title>Jumping the gun</title>
	<author>Zoxed</author>
	<datestamp>1256748360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The title ' "Three Strikes" To Go Ahead In Britain ' is, err, a little misleading (what, on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. ? never).</p><p>My understanding is that the policy is being proposed form inclusion in a new bill. AFAIK this then has to be bounced between The House of Commons and the Lords and finally signed by HRM before it is law. And this assumes it is not removed and/or amended in this process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The title ' " Three Strikes " To Go Ahead In Britain ' is , err , a little misleading ( what , on / .
? never ) .My understanding is that the policy is being proposed form inclusion in a new bill .
AFAIK this then has to be bounced between The House of Commons and the Lords and finally signed by HRM before it is law .
And this assumes it is not removed and/or amended in this process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title ' "Three Strikes" To Go Ahead In Britain ' is, err, a little misleading (what, on /.
? never).My understanding is that the policy is being proposed form inclusion in a new bill.
AFAIK this then has to be bounced between The House of Commons and the Lords and finally signed by HRM before it is law.
And this assumes it is not removed and/or amended in this process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897247</id>
	<title>Tempting...</title>
	<author>BumpyCarrot</author>
	<datestamp>1256744460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Still, worth it to stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared, right?" Truly, the cost is too dear, even for that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Still , worth it to stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared , right ?
" Truly , the cost is too dear , even for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Still, worth it to stop a few Lily Allen tracks being shared, right?
" Truly, the cost is too dear, even for that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961</id>
	<title>New rule</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1256743320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law. A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner, and gets banned from government after three strikes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law .
A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner , and gets banned from government after three strikes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose the three strikes law three strikes law.
A politician gets a strike for mentioning the three strikes law in a non-derisive manner, and gets banned from government after three strikes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902509</id>
	<title>Nomenclature</title>
	<author>JesseBHolmes</author>
	<datestamp>1256723820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do they call it 'three strikes' in Britain? They don't play baseball, and cricket has different rules in this respect.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they call it 'three strikes ' in Britain ?
They do n't play baseball , and cricket has different rules in this respect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they call it 'three strikes' in Britain?
They don't play baseball, and cricket has different rules in this respect.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899027</id>
	<title>expect the rhetoric</title>
	<author>jDeepbeep</author>
	<datestamp>1256751960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Agreed - ban encryption.</p></div><p>Anyone using encryption must have something to hide.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed - ban encryption.Anyone using encryption must have something to hide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed - ban encryption.Anyone using encryption must have something to hide.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896903</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29906743</id>
	<title>pathetic</title>
	<author>mrdtr</author>
	<datestamp>1256752380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do the citizens of the UK put up with this shit from their government? How are they going to know what you're downloading without invading your privacy? Oh wait, that's right,  the right to privacy doesn't exist in the UK.<br>It is time for every single person who values privacy to start encrypting everything thing they send or share.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do the citizens of the UK put up with this shit from their government ?
How are they going to know what you 're downloading without invading your privacy ?
Oh wait , that 's right , the right to privacy does n't exist in the UK.It is time for every single person who values privacy to start encrypting everything thing they send or share .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do the citizens of the UK put up with this shit from their government?
How are they going to know what you're downloading without invading your privacy?
Oh wait, that's right,  the right to privacy doesn't exist in the UK.It is time for every single person who values privacy to start encrypting everything thing they send or share.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902937</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>moogsynth</author>
	<datestamp>1256726100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd been trying to make this joke all week, but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket, I couldn't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about.  Three strikes and I suppose now *I'm* out.</p></div><p>Don't feel so bad about it. The OP got it wrong too. If you get bowled leg-before-wicket (LBW), then you're already out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd been trying to make this joke all week , but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket , I could n't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about .
Three strikes and I suppose now * I 'm * out.Do n't feel so bad about it .
The OP got it wrong too .
If you get bowled leg-before-wicket ( LBW ) , then you 're already out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd been trying to make this joke all week, but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket, I couldn't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about.
Three strikes and I suppose now *I'm* out.Don't feel so bad about it.
The OP got it wrong too.
If you get bowled leg-before-wicket (LBW), then you're already out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898305</id>
	<title>Lily Allen - hypocrite?</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1256748780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily\_Allen#Social\_activism" title="wikipedia.org">Lily Allen, Social Activism</a> [wikipedia.org] page and section:<blockquote><div><p>Lily Allen came out in strong support for disconnecting offenders. Creating a blog entitled "It's Not Alright" against file sharing, <b>it subsequently came to light that she had copied text directly from the Techdirt website of an interview with 50 Cent</b>. This led to an exchange on the internet, which culminated in accusations being made that Ms. Allen had infringed on other artists' copyrights by creating mix tapes early in her career, that she then made available via her website.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Pot?  Kettle is on the phone...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Lily Allen , Social Activism [ wikipedia.org ] page and section : Lily Allen came out in strong support for disconnecting offenders .
Creating a blog entitled " It 's Not Alright " against file sharing , it subsequently came to light that she had copied text directly from the Techdirt website of an interview with 50 Cent .
This led to an exchange on the internet , which culminated in accusations being made that Ms. Allen had infringed on other artists ' copyrights by creating mix tapes early in her career , that she then made available via her website .
Pot ? Kettle is on the phone.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Lily Allen, Social Activism [wikipedia.org] page and section:Lily Allen came out in strong support for disconnecting offenders.
Creating a blog entitled "It's Not Alright" against file sharing, it subsequently came to light that she had copied text directly from the Techdirt website of an interview with 50 Cent.
This led to an exchange on the internet, which culminated in accusations being made that Ms. Allen had infringed on other artists' copyrights by creating mix tapes early in her career, that she then made available via her website.
Pot?  Kettle is on the phone...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29904101</id>
	<title>I am now encrypting my tracker comms</title>
	<author>gilgongo</author>
	<datestamp>1256732640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not that I'm a BitTorrent guru in any way, but it strikes me that as I live in the UK, I need to proxy all my trackers communications through I2P. As far as I understand, that won't hurt my download speeds, but will present a non-traceable IP address to anyone who looks at my communications with the tracker. And if I turn on transport encryption as well, the contents of my P2P communications are at least obscured, even though my use of BitTorrent isn't.</p><p>Perhaps a BitTorrent guru can put me straight on this, but if I'm right, then a one-click install of I2P, and a couple of easy config changes in Azereus, seemed to do the trick for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I 'm a BitTorrent guru in any way , but it strikes me that as I live in the UK , I need to proxy all my trackers communications through I2P .
As far as I understand , that wo n't hurt my download speeds , but will present a non-traceable IP address to anyone who looks at my communications with the tracker .
And if I turn on transport encryption as well , the contents of my P2P communications are at least obscured , even though my use of BitTorrent is n't.Perhaps a BitTorrent guru can put me straight on this , but if I 'm right , then a one-click install of I2P , and a couple of easy config changes in Azereus , seemed to do the trick for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that I'm a BitTorrent guru in any way, but it strikes me that as I live in the UK, I need to proxy all my trackers communications through I2P.
As far as I understand, that won't hurt my download speeds, but will present a non-traceable IP address to anyone who looks at my communications with the tracker.
And if I turn on transport encryption as well, the contents of my P2P communications are at least obscured, even though my use of BitTorrent isn't.Perhaps a BitTorrent guru can put me straight on this, but if I'm right, then a one-click install of I2P, and a couple of easy config changes in Azereus, seemed to do the trick for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898283</id>
	<title>Pointing out the obvious</title>
	<author>oDDmON oUT</author>
	<datestamp>1256748720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a direct corollary to politicians being in bed with media and both parties fisting away like rabid hamsters.</p><p>No need for TOR, encryption, or any other technological fix, *if* we approach this problem politically.  It can be cured by term limits [in *any* democratically elected government], enforcement of existing laws, restrictions on lobbying, and public support of governmental transparency.</p><p>Of course the chances for this rank right up there with the second coming of a certain Nazarene, so I'm getting out my tin foil hat and battening down the hatches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a direct corollary to politicians being in bed with media and both parties fisting away like rabid hamsters.No need for TOR , encryption , or any other technological fix , * if * we approach this problem politically .
It can be cured by term limits [ in * any * democratically elected government ] , enforcement of existing laws , restrictions on lobbying , and public support of governmental transparency.Of course the chances for this rank right up there with the second coming of a certain Nazarene , so I 'm getting out my tin foil hat and battening down the hatches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a direct corollary to politicians being in bed with media and both parties fisting away like rabid hamsters.No need for TOR, encryption, or any other technological fix, *if* we approach this problem politically.
It can be cured by term limits [in *any* democratically elected government], enforcement of existing laws, restrictions on lobbying, and public support of governmental transparency.Of course the chances for this rank right up there with the second coming of a certain Nazarene, so I'm getting out my tin foil hat and battening down the hatches.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897147</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, there should be something to make sure that people do not consider this rule to be in the same ballpark as the rule prevalent in the criminal laws of the states in the U.S.  Yes, that pun was intended.</p><p>But more seriously, being punished with the loss of the use of the internet for continuing to do something that they have twice told you to stop doing is hardly the draconian rule that in America has lead to people serving 25 years for stealing three golf clubs because they had previously committed 2 felonies.  See Ewing v. California, 123 S.Ct. 1179 (2003).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , there should be something to make sure that people do not consider this rule to be in the same ballpark as the rule prevalent in the criminal laws of the states in the U.S. Yes , that pun was intended.But more seriously , being punished with the loss of the use of the internet for continuing to do something that they have twice told you to stop doing is hardly the draconian rule that in America has lead to people serving 25 years for stealing three golf clubs because they had previously committed 2 felonies .
See Ewing v. California , 123 S.Ct .
1179 ( 2003 ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, there should be something to make sure that people do not consider this rule to be in the same ballpark as the rule prevalent in the criminal laws of the states in the U.S.  Yes, that pun was intended.But more seriously, being punished with the loss of the use of the internet for continuing to do something that they have twice told you to stop doing is hardly the draconian rule that in America has lead to people serving 25 years for stealing three golf clubs because they had previously committed 2 felonies.
See Ewing v. California, 123 S.Ct.
1179 (2003).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898649</id>
	<title>Far too polite</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1256750340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Labour Party - you know, the social democrats - have behaved like the Newcastle Government of the pre-reform era in putting unelected and unelectable nonentities into power. (the Attorney General is another unelectable, "Baroness" Scotland.) Mandelson has too much time in which to make this stuff actually happen. This is the guy who suppressed any attempt by the British Press to mention his Brazilian boyfriend - he is hardly an advertisement for freedom of information - and who is trying to privatise the Royal Mail against the views of the great majority including many in his own party. My suspicion is that he is actually a long-term deep penetration Conservative mole whose job is to make labour unelectable. He's even managed to make Labour give him a peerage so that the Conservatives won't be seen to do it. He is the best argument for abolishing the House of Lords imaginable.<p>We need a new Reform Bill. Actually, we need a new Glorious Revolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Labour Party - you know , the social democrats - have behaved like the Newcastle Government of the pre-reform era in putting unelected and unelectable nonentities into power .
( the Attorney General is another unelectable , " Baroness " Scotland .
) Mandelson has too much time in which to make this stuff actually happen .
This is the guy who suppressed any attempt by the British Press to mention his Brazilian boyfriend - he is hardly an advertisement for freedom of information - and who is trying to privatise the Royal Mail against the views of the great majority including many in his own party .
My suspicion is that he is actually a long-term deep penetration Conservative mole whose job is to make labour unelectable .
He 's even managed to make Labour give him a peerage so that the Conservatives wo n't be seen to do it .
He is the best argument for abolishing the House of Lords imaginable.We need a new Reform Bill .
Actually , we need a new Glorious Revolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Labour Party - you know, the social democrats - have behaved like the Newcastle Government of the pre-reform era in putting unelected and unelectable nonentities into power.
(the Attorney General is another unelectable, "Baroness" Scotland.
) Mandelson has too much time in which to make this stuff actually happen.
This is the guy who suppressed any attempt by the British Press to mention his Brazilian boyfriend - he is hardly an advertisement for freedom of information - and who is trying to privatise the Royal Mail against the views of the great majority including many in his own party.
My suspicion is that he is actually a long-term deep penetration Conservative mole whose job is to make labour unelectable.
He's even managed to make Labour give him a peerage so that the Conservatives won't be seen to do it.
He is the best argument for abolishing the House of Lords imaginable.We need a new Reform Bill.
Actually, we need a new Glorious Revolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897377</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1256745000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was thinking something along the line of red card analgoies, but you normally don't get three "strikes" before the red card.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking something along the line of red card analgoies , but you normally do n't get three " strikes " before the red card .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking something along the line of red card analgoies, but you normally don't get three "strikes" before the red card.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897191</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I said a similar thing when TorrentFreak announced that TPB was ordered to delete torrents and access to the Dutch was blocked:</p><p>http://santiance.com/2009/10/pirate-bay-court-ordered-to-delete-torrents/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I said a similar thing when TorrentFreak announced that TPB was ordered to delete torrents and access to the Dutch was blocked : http : //santiance.com/2009/10/pirate-bay-court-ordered-to-delete-torrents/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I said a similar thing when TorrentFreak announced that TPB was ordered to delete torrents and access to the Dutch was blocked:http://santiance.com/2009/10/pirate-bay-court-ordered-to-delete-torrents/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901617</id>
	<title>Re:Level of Responsibility</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1256762700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Presumably there will be no (or irrelevantly small) penalties for filing incorrect complaints.  As such, the best course of action will be to inundate the ISPs of the relevant politicians with notices requesting their disconnection.  For added fun, send them from a different country so the penalties can't be enforced even if they do exist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably there will be no ( or irrelevantly small ) penalties for filing incorrect complaints .
As such , the best course of action will be to inundate the ISPs of the relevant politicians with notices requesting their disconnection .
For added fun , send them from a different country so the penalties ca n't be enforced even if they do exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably there will be no (or irrelevantly small) penalties for filing incorrect complaints.
As such, the best course of action will be to inundate the ISPs of the relevant politicians with notices requesting their disconnection.
For added fun, send them from a different country so the penalties can't be enforced even if they do exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853</id>
	<title>Seriously, write to them</title>
	<author>kazade84</author>
	<datestamp>1256742960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've contacted my MP. The open rights group has a brief PDF to send to them so they are clued up. Ask them to back EDM 1997.</p><p>More info here: <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/ask-your-mp-to-help-protect-our-freedoms-on-the-net" title="openrightsgroup.org">http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/ask-your-mp-to-help-protect-our-freedoms-on-the-net</a> [openrightsgroup.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've contacted my MP .
The open rights group has a brief PDF to send to them so they are clued up .
Ask them to back EDM 1997.More info here : http : //www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/ask-your-mp-to-help-protect-our-freedoms-on-the-net [ openrightsgroup.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've contacted my MP.
The open rights group has a brief PDF to send to them so they are clued up.
Ask them to back EDM 1997.More info here: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/ask-your-mp-to-help-protect-our-freedoms-on-the-net [openrightsgroup.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899829</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously, write to them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256755140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for the link, I'll be contacting my MP, who isn't a member of the incumbent party and is actually a member of the Culture, Media and Sport Parliamentary Committee.</p><p>Incidentally, from your link:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>today Patrick Wintour, Political Editor of the Guardian, has written this piece, outlining the public's disquiet about Mandelson's plans to disconnect users without legal due process. <b>It also shows that the public see this as a vote loser for any party that brings it in.</b></p> </div><p>I'm still seething about the fact my kids will be paying off the massive debts they have amassed buying their banker friends out of trouble, so perhaps it would be better to let them have enough rope to hang themselves with. They can take the unelected <i> <b>Mr</b> </i> Mandelson with them into the political wilderness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for the link , I 'll be contacting my MP , who is n't a member of the incumbent party and is actually a member of the Culture , Media and Sport Parliamentary Committee.Incidentally , from your link : today Patrick Wintour , Political Editor of the Guardian , has written this piece , outlining the public 's disquiet about Mandelson 's plans to disconnect users without legal due process .
It also shows that the public see this as a vote loser for any party that brings it in .
I 'm still seething about the fact my kids will be paying off the massive debts they have amassed buying their banker friends out of trouble , so perhaps it would be better to let them have enough rope to hang themselves with .
They can take the unelected Mr Mandelson with them into the political wilderness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for the link, I'll be contacting my MP, who isn't a member of the incumbent party and is actually a member of the Culture, Media and Sport Parliamentary Committee.Incidentally, from your link:today Patrick Wintour, Political Editor of the Guardian, has written this piece, outlining the public's disquiet about Mandelson's plans to disconnect users without legal due process.
It also shows that the public see this as a vote loser for any party that brings it in.
I'm still seething about the fact my kids will be paying off the massive debts they have amassed buying their banker friends out of trouble, so perhaps it would be better to let them have enough rope to hang themselves with.
They can take the unelected  Mr  Mandelson with them into the political wilderness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901521</id>
	<title>Re:New rule</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256762340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898547</id>
	<title>Re:Why would P2P switch to encryption?</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1256749800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Encryption itself won't help much here, but things like tor and freenet would.  If someone were to apply the ideas behind tor to something like BitTorrent, it'd be impossible to tell whether any given node in a torrent were actually using the material it were distributing or simply sitting there passing it on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Encryption itself wo n't help much here , but things like tor and freenet would .
If someone were to apply the ideas behind tor to something like BitTorrent , it 'd be impossible to tell whether any given node in a torrent were actually using the material it were distributing or simply sitting there passing it on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Encryption itself won't help much here, but things like tor and freenet would.
If someone were to apply the ideas behind tor to something like BitTorrent, it'd be impossible to tell whether any given node in a torrent were actually using the material it were distributing or simply sitting there passing it on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899249</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256752980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You miss the point.  It doesn't prevent them from doing that; it <em>makes</em> them do that.  Forcing your opponent to take active steps instead of getting everything they want by passively watching (especially stuff like mandated ISP filters, where the users would end up having to pay for it), is a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You miss the point .
It does n't prevent them from doing that ; it makes them do that .
Forcing your opponent to take active steps instead of getting everything they want by passively watching ( especially stuff like mandated ISP filters , where the users would end up having to pay for it ) , is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You miss the point.
It doesn't prevent them from doing that; it makes them do that.
Forcing your opponent to take active steps instead of getting everything they want by passively watching (especially stuff like mandated ISP filters, where the users would end up having to pay for it), is a good thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898877</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898877</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256751300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Question</p><p>- How will encryption stop a rights-holder, like Warner Bros, downloading a torrent of Dark Knight and simply recording all the IP addresses they see down/uploading the content?  As far as I can tell they can do that, will report it, and thus you'll get a strike.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Question- How will encryption stop a rights-holder , like Warner Bros , downloading a torrent of Dark Knight and simply recording all the IP addresses they see down/uploading the content ?
As far as I can tell they can do that , will report it , and thus you 'll get a strike .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Question- How will encryption stop a rights-holder, like Warner Bros, downloading a torrent of Dark Knight and simply recording all the IP addresses they see down/uploading the content?
As far as I can tell they can do that, will report it, and thus you'll get a strike.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897415</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</id>
	<title>Can't Wait</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1256743440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them, three times, of copyright violations. Perhaps, once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world, they'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is. When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment, the possibilities of abuse are egregious.<br> <br>
Ah, the days of "innocent until proven guilty" seem like a distant memory now...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them , three times , of copyright violations .
Perhaps , once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world , they 'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is .
When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment , the possibilities of abuse are egregious .
Ah , the days of " innocent until proven guilty " seem like a distant memory now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them, three times, of copyright violations.
Perhaps, once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world, they'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is.
When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment, the possibilities of abuse are egregious.
Ah, the days of "innocent until proven guilty" seem like a distant memory now...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897245</id>
	<title>Widespread Encryption</title>
	<author>DanMelks</author>
	<datestamp>1256744460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>...And I say we need to be encrypting our traffic anyway. The average computer contains more than enough processing power, and the average 'pipe' width can easily handle the extra resources needed for widespread use of encryption in day-to-day use.
<br> <br>
In addition, the recent trend in government is towards snooping and perv-ish behavior: China with its "great" firewall, USA with its unwarranted spying and packet sniffing, and now the UK with its new "three-strikes" policies. I pay my ISP a significant sum of money to deliver me 1s and 0s as fast as they can, and there are very, very few exceptions in which they have a need to know what those 1s and 0s add up to.
<br> <br>
I call upon the open source community to lead the way -- while I would love to see the big leagues (Microsoft, Apple, etc) apply their tonnage behind such a problem, pigs are more likely to fly first. How hard would it be for a browser to automatically attempt to negotiate a secure connection for every visited web page and only use normal, unencrypted access when a secure connection fails or cannot be completed in a secure amount of time? People running web servers would not have to make major modifications, only implement a new protocol.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...And I say we need to be encrypting our traffic anyway .
The average computer contains more than enough processing power , and the average 'pipe ' width can easily handle the extra resources needed for widespread use of encryption in day-to-day use .
In addition , the recent trend in government is towards snooping and perv-ish behavior : China with its " great " firewall , USA with its unwarranted spying and packet sniffing , and now the UK with its new " three-strikes " policies .
I pay my ISP a significant sum of money to deliver me 1s and 0s as fast as they can , and there are very , very few exceptions in which they have a need to know what those 1s and 0s add up to .
I call upon the open source community to lead the way -- while I would love to see the big leagues ( Microsoft , Apple , etc ) apply their tonnage behind such a problem , pigs are more likely to fly first .
How hard would it be for a browser to automatically attempt to negotiate a secure connection for every visited web page and only use normal , unencrypted access when a secure connection fails or can not be completed in a secure amount of time ?
People running web servers would not have to make major modifications , only implement a new protocol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...And I say we need to be encrypting our traffic anyway.
The average computer contains more than enough processing power, and the average 'pipe' width can easily handle the extra resources needed for widespread use of encryption in day-to-day use.
In addition, the recent trend in government is towards snooping and perv-ish behavior: China with its "great" firewall, USA with its unwarranted spying and packet sniffing, and now the UK with its new "three-strikes" policies.
I pay my ISP a significant sum of money to deliver me 1s and 0s as fast as they can, and there are very, very few exceptions in which they have a need to know what those 1s and 0s add up to.
I call upon the open source community to lead the way -- while I would love to see the big leagues (Microsoft, Apple, etc) apply their tonnage behind such a problem, pigs are more likely to fly first.
How hard would it be for a browser to automatically attempt to negotiate a secure connection for every visited web page and only use normal, unencrypted access when a secure connection fails or cannot be completed in a secure amount of time?
People running web servers would not have to make major modifications, only implement a new protocol.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899239</id>
	<title>So which P2P to use now ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256752920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The day the 3-strike-and-you-are-out law came to my country I fired up <a href="http://oneswarm.cs.washington.edu/download.html" title="washington.edu" rel="nofollow">OneSwarm</a> [washington.edu] in defiance. I haven't been using gnutella or BitTorrent much in the last year or so because of fear, yes, but also because it was getting increasingly inefficient: my ADSL modem would slow down and then disconnect after less than an hour. I'd tried OneSwarm before, to find it very slow and with a rather poor interface. So on that day I fired it up and I was astounded to be able to download 6Gb in one night ! Needless to say, I consider that this law made great improvements to P2P technology !!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The day the 3-strike-and-you-are-out law came to my country I fired up OneSwarm [ washington.edu ] in defiance .
I have n't been using gnutella or BitTorrent much in the last year or so because of fear , yes , but also because it was getting increasingly inefficient : my ADSL modem would slow down and then disconnect after less than an hour .
I 'd tried OneSwarm before , to find it very slow and with a rather poor interface .
So on that day I fired it up and I was astounded to be able to download 6Gb in one night !
Needless to say , I consider that this law made great improvements to P2P technology ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The day the 3-strike-and-you-are-out law came to my country I fired up OneSwarm [washington.edu] in defiance.
I haven't been using gnutella or BitTorrent much in the last year or so because of fear, yes, but also because it was getting increasingly inefficient: my ADSL modem would slow down and then disconnect after less than an hour.
I'd tried OneSwarm before, to find it very slow and with a rather poor interface.
So on that day I fired it up and I was astounded to be able to download 6Gb in one night !
Needless to say, I consider that this law made great improvements to P2P technology !!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900131</id>
	<title>Re:Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>computational super</author>
	<datestamp>1256756280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I'm all for encryption becoming the norm.

For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.</i>
<p>Umm... yeah, actually I think they are - if Big Content can't snoop on your communications, neither can Big Brother (whether you think this is good or bad is another matter entirely).</p><p>Actually, what they're talking about isn't widespread encryption (that's already in place, e.g. SSL), but widespread anonymity.  P2P over SSL is no more secure from a record label sniffer than P2P over cleartext - they just attack the P2P network (that's what they do today - they're not actually doing network monitoring).  What the British are afraid of is widespread anonymity (like Freenet, for example) - and with that, neither law enforcement nor Geffen records can see what you're downloading or uploading.</p><p>That said, they have nothing to worry about.  Widespread anonymity will never become the norm.  Any truly censorship-resistant scheme, whatever it may be, will be resistant against ALL censorship, not just selective censorship.  So if you believe that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mp3's and scientology documents should not be censored, but porn should, you're out of luck if you want a technical solution.  And the (sad, IMHO) fact is that most people support censorship of at least some things and will never buy into a system that makes this impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm all for encryption becoming the norm .
For legitimate law enforcement needs , search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded .
Umm... yeah , actually I think they are - if Big Content ca n't snoop on your communications , neither can Big Brother ( whether you think this is good or bad is another matter entirely ) .Actually , what they 're talking about is n't widespread encryption ( that 's already in place , e.g .
SSL ) , but widespread anonymity .
P2P over SSL is no more secure from a record label sniffer than P2P over cleartext - they just attack the P2P network ( that 's what they do today - they 're not actually doing network monitoring ) .
What the British are afraid of is widespread anonymity ( like Freenet , for example ) - and with that , neither law enforcement nor Geffen records can see what you 're downloading or uploading.That said , they have nothing to worry about .
Widespread anonymity will never become the norm .
Any truly censorship-resistant scheme , whatever it may be , will be resistant against ALL censorship , not just selective censorship .
So if you believe that .mp3 's and scientology documents should not be censored , but porn should , you 're out of luck if you want a technical solution .
And the ( sad , IMHO ) fact is that most people support censorship of at least some things and will never buy into a system that makes this impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm all for encryption becoming the norm.
For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.
Umm... yeah, actually I think they are - if Big Content can't snoop on your communications, neither can Big Brother (whether you think this is good or bad is another matter entirely).Actually, what they're talking about isn't widespread encryption (that's already in place, e.g.
SSL), but widespread anonymity.
P2P over SSL is no more secure from a record label sniffer than P2P over cleartext - they just attack the P2P network (that's what they do today - they're not actually doing network monitoring).
What the British are afraid of is widespread anonymity (like Freenet, for example) - and with that, neither law enforcement nor Geffen records can see what you're downloading or uploading.That said, they have nothing to worry about.
Widespread anonymity will never become the norm.
Any truly censorship-resistant scheme, whatever it may be, will be resistant against ALL censorship, not just selective censorship.
So if you believe that .mp3's and scientology documents should not be censored, but porn should, you're out of luck if you want a technical solution.
And the (sad, IMHO) fact is that most people support censorship of at least some things and will never buy into a system that makes this impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901237</id>
	<title>Yea Right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256760960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this stupid darn government in this country spent a lot more time thinking about the indiginous population of the country and less about the goings on elsewhere we would be in far better shape than we are now , Copyright AND Patents both need putting firmly in the trashcan then maybe we can all get on with life .</p><p>The big problem we have is the the biggest ISP in the country is far too closley linked to Yahoo and M$ Corp for their own good so when someone says in the US says jump idiotic jerks here ask how high instead of turning round and tekking them get stuffed son shine .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this stupid darn government in this country spent a lot more time thinking about the indiginous population of the country and less about the goings on elsewhere we would be in far better shape than we are now , Copyright AND Patents both need putting firmly in the trashcan then maybe we can all get on with life .The big problem we have is the the biggest ISP in the country is far too closley linked to Yahoo and M $ Corp for their own good so when someone says in the US says jump idiotic jerks here ask how high instead of turning round and tekking them get stuffed son shine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this stupid darn government in this country spent a lot more time thinking about the indiginous population of the country and less about the goings on elsewhere we would be in far better shape than we are now , Copyright AND Patents both need putting firmly in the trashcan then maybe we can all get on with life .The big problem we have is the the biggest ISP in the country is far too closley linked to Yahoo and M$ Corp for their own good so when someone says in the US says jump idiotic jerks here ask how high instead of turning round and tekking them get stuffed son shine .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900721</id>
	<title>Re:Mandelson is waiting for his third strike</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1256758680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suspect the Conservatives are sufficiently pragmatic to make soothing noise to Big Meeja, take their campaign money, and then do nothing about it once they get in.  One of my main reasons for favouring the Tories this time around is they seem not to have the Labour approach of knee-jerk legislation for any given problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect the Conservatives are sufficiently pragmatic to make soothing noise to Big Meeja , take their campaign money , and then do nothing about it once they get in .
One of my main reasons for favouring the Tories this time around is they seem not to have the Labour approach of knee-jerk legislation for any given problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect the Conservatives are sufficiently pragmatic to make soothing noise to Big Meeja, take their campaign money, and then do nothing about it once they get in.
One of my main reasons for favouring the Tories this time around is they seem not to have the Labour approach of knee-jerk legislation for any given problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897131</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Sockatume</author>
	<datestamp>1256743980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And that old favourite, "ban quashed due to bad light".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And that old favourite , " ban quashed due to bad light " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And that old favourite, "ban quashed due to bad light".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29947220</id>
	<title>Keep wireless networks open</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257096120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of the occupation government, they need to keep their wireless networks open.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of the occupation government , they need to keep their wireless networks open .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of the occupation government, they need to keep their wireless networks open.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885</id>
	<title>Encryption is a bad thing?</title>
	<author>xtal</author>
	<datestamp>1256743080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure if this place has changed over the years, but I'm all for encryption becoming the norm.</p><p>For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.</p><p>In fact, draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever - it would illustrate the absurdity of the status quo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure if this place has changed over the years , but I 'm all for encryption becoming the norm.For legitimate law enforcement needs , search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.In fact , draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever - it would illustrate the absurdity of the status quo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure if this place has changed over the years, but I'm all for encryption becoming the norm.For legitimate law enforcement needs, search warrants and traffic analysis are not impeded.In fact, draconian enforcement of copyright would be the best thing ever - it would illustrate the absurdity of the status quo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898199</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>Gandalf\_the\_Beardy</author>
	<datestamp>1256748300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Innocent until proven guilt has been around for a long time - in fact the right to it in English Common Law and by extent in US law descends from the same place - the meadow in Runnymede in 1215AD where King John impressed his seal onto and issued Magna Carta..

"NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Innocent until proven guilt has been around for a long time - in fact the right to it in English Common Law and by extent in US law descends from the same place - the meadow in Runnymede in 1215AD where King John impressed his seal onto and issued Magna Carta. . " NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned , or be disseised of his Freehold , or Liberties , or free Customs , or be outlawed , or exiled , or any other wise destroyed ; nor will We not pass upon him , nor condemn him , but by lawful judgment of his Peers , or by the Law of the land .
We will sell to no man , we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Innocent until proven guilt has been around for a long time - in fact the right to it in English Common Law and by extent in US law descends from the same place - the meadow in Runnymede in 1215AD where King John impressed his seal onto and issued Magna Carta..

"NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land.
We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896851</id>
	<title>Three Strikes on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256742960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can we also have a 3 strikes law on Slashdot for dupes??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we also have a 3 strikes law on Slashdot for dupes ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we also have a 3 strikes law on Slashdot for dupes?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908413</id>
	<title>Re:Seriously, write to them</title>
	<author>jez9999</author>
	<datestamp>1256819460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As has been said by others, you'll almost certainly get the good old form letter and the MP being written to won't even see your words.  Want to really hit them where it hurts?  Vote for someone else.  And join a party that isn't one of the big three... we need to make sure their time is passed.</p><p>I'd suggest the <a href="http://pirateparty.org.uk/" title="pirateparty.org.uk">Pirate Party UK</a> [pirateparty.org.uk].  All new members welcome.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As has been said by others , you 'll almost certainly get the good old form letter and the MP being written to wo n't even see your words .
Want to really hit them where it hurts ?
Vote for someone else .
And join a party that is n't one of the big three... we need to make sure their time is passed.I 'd suggest the Pirate Party UK [ pirateparty.org.uk ] .
All new members welcome .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As has been said by others, you'll almost certainly get the good old form letter and the MP being written to won't even see your words.
Want to really hit them where it hurts?
Vote for someone else.
And join a party that isn't one of the big three... we need to make sure their time is passed.I'd suggest the Pirate Party UK [pirateparty.org.uk].
All new members welcome.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902795</id>
	<title>this will just result in</title>
	<author>Archfeld</author>
	<datestamp>1256725320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>encryption being declared illegal in GB, or worse, having to register your encryption key with the government or risk being classified as a terrorist. MI5/6 and the other law enforcement agencies are doing the 'not our idea' dance right now, but they know in the long run the Nanny-State that is the GB will not allow somthing like a persons privacy to stand in the way of spreading fear and mis-information under the guise of protecting the nation.<br><b>If they criminalize encryption, only criminals will have it...</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>encryption being declared illegal in GB , or worse , having to register your encryption key with the government or risk being classified as a terrorist .
MI5/6 and the other law enforcement agencies are doing the 'not our idea ' dance right now , but they know in the long run the Nanny-State that is the GB will not allow somthing like a persons privacy to stand in the way of spreading fear and mis-information under the guise of protecting the nation.If they criminalize encryption , only criminals will have it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>encryption being declared illegal in GB, or worse, having to register your encryption key with the government or risk being classified as a terrorist.
MI5/6 and the other law enforcement agencies are doing the 'not our idea' dance right now, but they know in the long run the Nanny-State that is the GB will not allow somthing like a persons privacy to stand in the way of spreading fear and mis-information under the guise of protecting the nation.If they criminalize encryption, only criminals will have it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29904883</id>
	<title>Good</title>
	<author>sn00pers</author>
	<datestamp>1256737320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suppose I may be the only one here that thinks protecting the rights of the people who's work is being stolen is a good thing? The whole point of the 3 strikes is in case mistakes are made and there are plenty of points to appeal etc.

Is it really that unfair for their to be at least some sort of protection for people to prevent their worked from being stolen and to prevent them from being put out of business by theives? Of is the mentality that anyone who creates content that is digital has no rights to make a living?

Perhaps if people who are against these protections would simply come up with a better way to protect digital content from rampant theft, then this wouldn't be an issue. If someone did, they would be rich. So there's plenty of incentive, yet no one does. Why? The people creating the content certainly have been trying.

So is everyone really against this because they really think it's against the law, or is it because many people simply enjoy the ability to steal anything they want and have no regard for the people who are being put out of work?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose I may be the only one here that thinks protecting the rights of the people who 's work is being stolen is a good thing ?
The whole point of the 3 strikes is in case mistakes are made and there are plenty of points to appeal etc .
Is it really that unfair for their to be at least some sort of protection for people to prevent their worked from being stolen and to prevent them from being put out of business by theives ?
Of is the mentality that anyone who creates content that is digital has no rights to make a living ?
Perhaps if people who are against these protections would simply come up with a better way to protect digital content from rampant theft , then this would n't be an issue .
If someone did , they would be rich .
So there 's plenty of incentive , yet no one does .
Why ? The people creating the content certainly have been trying .
So is everyone really against this because they really think it 's against the law , or is it because many people simply enjoy the ability to steal anything they want and have no regard for the people who are being put out of work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose I may be the only one here that thinks protecting the rights of the people who's work is being stolen is a good thing?
The whole point of the 3 strikes is in case mistakes are made and there are plenty of points to appeal etc.
Is it really that unfair for their to be at least some sort of protection for people to prevent their worked from being stolen and to prevent them from being put out of business by theives?
Of is the mentality that anyone who creates content that is digital has no rights to make a living?
Perhaps if people who are against these protections would simply come up with a better way to protect digital content from rampant theft, then this wouldn't be an issue.
If someone did, they would be rich.
So there's plenty of incentive, yet no one does.
Why? The people creating the content certainly have been trying.
So is everyone really against this because they really think it's against the law, or is it because many people simply enjoy the ability to steal anything they want and have no regard for the people who are being put out of work?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898549</id>
	<title>Some speculations on the motives</title>
	<author>zuki</author>
	<datestamp>1256749800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am struggling to understand the deep disconnect at work here... <br>
These people in government have advisors, technical experts and all sorts of qualified people to tell them how worthless this will be.<br> <br>
It boggles the imagination to not even contemplate the number of false positives this will generate, besides encryption, it has been pointed out<br>
many times that all this may do is drive more people to hack their neighbors' wireless networks, using Kismet or other trivial password sniffers.<br>
If up to 10\% of all PCs worldwide can be hacked into botnets, it doesn't take a genius to see doing similar things from other people's machines <br>
and let them take the fall for it....<br> <br>
The only explanation I can come up with is that either:
<ul>
<li>This is just a public rehearsal for a forthcoming Monty Python skit... but a really bad one at that.</li><li>Or maybe someone in government volunteering a really Kafka-esque script for <b>Brazil 2</b>, a sequel to one of the already <br>
widely-acknowledged cinematic references in truly depressing thoughts, to first be tested on the public for 'authenticity' on how to <br>
best persecute innocent people with maximum effect?</li><li>That such a situation amply demonstrates the obstinate nature of that famous British <b>stiff upper-lip</b> in the face of common <br>
 sense, but also cunningly facilitates implementing surveillance and further counter-measures against 'criminalization'. (see above)</li></ul><p>

Regardless of the answer to these silly questions, one can only wonder what the endgame will be. Enforcement or not, the major content holders<br>
cannot keep going the way they have been, and with ever-dwindling revenue, (especially in the music divisions) will eventually have their assets<br>
ultimately disposed of at the auction block for pennies on the dollar to people like Google, who will love nothing better than to practically give<br>
it away for free, in trying to lure customers to purchase other things, rather than to keep suing them for not buying physical goods in formats<br>
that were once popular during the previous century, and still demanding to charge the same price for it without the old expenses.<br> <br>

And what will this grand adventure have accomplished? There is a name for that special moment in the hunt, when the game is barely walking, <br>
bleeding profusely, surrounded by a pack of growling dogs, but still trying to gore one of them on their way out....<i>In French "La Cur&#233;e"</i> <br>
<br>
That's pretty much what it feels like.... Really!<br>

Scorched Earth Policy..... This too will come to pass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am struggling to understand the deep disconnect at work here.. . These people in government have advisors , technical experts and all sorts of qualified people to tell them how worthless this will be .
It boggles the imagination to not even contemplate the number of false positives this will generate , besides encryption , it has been pointed out many times that all this may do is drive more people to hack their neighbors ' wireless networks , using Kismet or other trivial password sniffers .
If up to 10 \ % of all PCs worldwide can be hacked into botnets , it does n't take a genius to see doing similar things from other people 's machines and let them take the fall for it... . The only explanation I can come up with is that either : This is just a public rehearsal for a forthcoming Monty Python skit... but a really bad one at that.Or maybe someone in government volunteering a really Kafka-esque script for Brazil 2 , a sequel to one of the already widely-acknowledged cinematic references in truly depressing thoughts , to first be tested on the public for 'authenticity ' on how to best persecute innocent people with maximum effect ? That such a situation amply demonstrates the obstinate nature of that famous British stiff upper-lip in the face of common sense , but also cunningly facilitates implementing surveillance and further counter-measures against 'criminalization' .
( see above ) Regardless of the answer to these silly questions , one can only wonder what the endgame will be .
Enforcement or not , the major content holders can not keep going the way they have been , and with ever-dwindling revenue , ( especially in the music divisions ) will eventually have their assets ultimately disposed of at the auction block for pennies on the dollar to people like Google , who will love nothing better than to practically give it away for free , in trying to lure customers to purchase other things , rather than to keep suing them for not buying physical goods in formats that were once popular during the previous century , and still demanding to charge the same price for it without the old expenses .
And what will this grand adventure have accomplished ?
There is a name for that special moment in the hunt , when the game is barely walking , bleeding profusely , surrounded by a pack of growling dogs , but still trying to gore one of them on their way out....In French " La Cur   e " That 's pretty much what it feels like.... Really ! Scorched Earth Policy..... This too will come to pass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am struggling to understand the deep disconnect at work here... 
These people in government have advisors, technical experts and all sorts of qualified people to tell them how worthless this will be.
It boggles the imagination to not even contemplate the number of false positives this will generate, besides encryption, it has been pointed out
many times that all this may do is drive more people to hack their neighbors' wireless networks, using Kismet or other trivial password sniffers.
If up to 10\% of all PCs worldwide can be hacked into botnets, it doesn't take a genius to see doing similar things from other people's machines 
and let them take the fall for it.... 
The only explanation I can come up with is that either:

This is just a public rehearsal for a forthcoming Monty Python skit... but a really bad one at that.Or maybe someone in government volunteering a really Kafka-esque script for Brazil 2, a sequel to one of the already 
widely-acknowledged cinematic references in truly depressing thoughts, to first be tested on the public for 'authenticity' on how to 
best persecute innocent people with maximum effect?That such a situation amply demonstrates the obstinate nature of that famous British stiff upper-lip in the face of common 
 sense, but also cunningly facilitates implementing surveillance and further counter-measures against 'criminalization'.
(see above)

Regardless of the answer to these silly questions, one can only wonder what the endgame will be.
Enforcement or not, the major content holders
cannot keep going the way they have been, and with ever-dwindling revenue, (especially in the music divisions) will eventually have their assets
ultimately disposed of at the auction block for pennies on the dollar to people like Google, who will love nothing better than to practically give
it away for free, in trying to lure customers to purchase other things, rather than to keep suing them for not buying physical goods in formats
that were once popular during the previous century, and still demanding to charge the same price for it without the old expenses.
And what will this grand adventure have accomplished?
There is a name for that special moment in the hunt, when the game is barely walking, 
bleeding profusely, surrounded by a pack of growling dogs, but still trying to gore one of them on their way out....In French "La Curée" 

That's pretty much what it feels like.... Really!

Scorched Earth Policy..... This too will come to pass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897095</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1256743800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm betting they are excluded from this law a in typical neo-fascist fashion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm betting they are excluded from this law a in typical neo-fascist fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm betting they are excluded from this law a in typical neo-fascist fashion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29925483</id>
	<title>Bad Eggs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256924220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UK goveerment pay 'experts' a lot of money to advise them and then ignore what they are told. That is why we are 42nd in the world for broadband and why BT stopped fiber optic roll outs.</p><p>As far a file sharing MP3's, the music laws are draconian and should be put in line with other copyrights. Protected for 70 years after the death seems exessive to me! Expecailly when a tune is often inspired by another piece of music. I say when you go, your music should be up for anyone to copy or use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UK goveerment pay 'experts ' a lot of money to advise them and then ignore what they are told .
That is why we are 42nd in the world for broadband and why BT stopped fiber optic roll outs.As far a file sharing MP3 's , the music laws are draconian and should be put in line with other copyrights .
Protected for 70 years after the death seems exessive to me !
Expecailly when a tune is often inspired by another piece of music .
I say when you go , your music should be up for anyone to copy or use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UK goveerment pay 'experts' a lot of money to advise them and then ignore what they are told.
That is why we are 42nd in the world for broadband and why BT stopped fiber optic roll outs.As far a file sharing MP3's, the music laws are draconian and should be put in line with other copyrights.
Protected for 70 years after the death seems exessive to me!
Expecailly when a tune is often inspired by another piece of music.
I say when you go, your music should be up for anyone to copy or use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1256744100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BTW, the UK has never had "innocent until proven guilty".  I'm pretty sure it's the other way around there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW , the UK has never had " innocent until proven guilty " .
I 'm pretty sure it 's the other way around there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW, the UK has never had "innocent until proven guilty".
I'm pretty sure it's the other way around there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897817</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>VShael</author>
	<datestamp>1256746740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'd just make themselves exempt. Anyone could predict that. It's not like they haven't done it before. (The RIPA laws, see <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/ripa\_iii\_figures" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/ripa\_iii\_figures</a> [theregister.co.uk] )</p><p>What you need to do is target their kids, spouses, partners or loved ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'd just make themselves exempt .
Anyone could predict that .
It 's not like they have n't done it before .
( The RIPA laws , see http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/ripa \ _iii \ _figures [ theregister.co.uk ] ) What you need to do is target their kids , spouses , partners or loved ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'd just make themselves exempt.
Anyone could predict that.
It's not like they haven't done it before.
(The RIPA laws, see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/ripa\_iii\_figures [theregister.co.uk] )What you need to do is target their kids, spouses, partners or loved ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908073</id>
	<title>Re:Good</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256814300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use to have to pay $30 for a CD that would have ONE song on it I liked, which I would have herd on the radio for the first time. I didn't have the ability to just pick and chose which songs I wanted. Using CDs I could only have ONE in my diskman at a time meaning I had to constantly swap them in and out.</p><p>When I hear a song I like I now have the ability to go and listen to other songs by an artist to see if I like what else they have. That allows me to make an informed decision about whether I should buy them or not. I get ALL the information rather then just what the radio thinks I should have. With an MP3 player I can put only songs I like on and just have a random shuffle.</p><p>If the music industry hadn't of been so anti-change, they might have been the ones to come up with an idea like the iTunes store. If they had I bet things would have turned out very different. Because they were making so much profit... Sorry, they were making so much "living" off CDs they didn't want to change.</p><p>I'm a developer, I love what I do. Sure I get paid, but it's pennies compared to what the software I write A) Saves my company and B) earns them in the end. Kind of funny since my software is for research and is given away instead of sold. You should love what you do and do it because you love it, not because you make tons of money for it.</p><p>Why should an "artist" make more money then a doctor or a teacher. I think they've been making a "living" for a very long time. They're just bitter because now they can't waste hundreds of thousands on diamond encrusted watches anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use to have to pay $ 30 for a CD that would have ONE song on it I liked , which I would have herd on the radio for the first time .
I did n't have the ability to just pick and chose which songs I wanted .
Using CDs I could only have ONE in my diskman at a time meaning I had to constantly swap them in and out.When I hear a song I like I now have the ability to go and listen to other songs by an artist to see if I like what else they have .
That allows me to make an informed decision about whether I should buy them or not .
I get ALL the information rather then just what the radio thinks I should have .
With an MP3 player I can put only songs I like on and just have a random shuffle.If the music industry had n't of been so anti-change , they might have been the ones to come up with an idea like the iTunes store .
If they had I bet things would have turned out very different .
Because they were making so much profit... Sorry , they were making so much " living " off CDs they did n't want to change.I 'm a developer , I love what I do .
Sure I get paid , but it 's pennies compared to what the software I write A ) Saves my company and B ) earns them in the end .
Kind of funny since my software is for research and is given away instead of sold .
You should love what you do and do it because you love it , not because you make tons of money for it.Why should an " artist " make more money then a doctor or a teacher .
I think they 've been making a " living " for a very long time .
They 're just bitter because now they ca n't waste hundreds of thousands on diamond encrusted watches anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use to have to pay $30 for a CD that would have ONE song on it I liked, which I would have herd on the radio for the first time.
I didn't have the ability to just pick and chose which songs I wanted.
Using CDs I could only have ONE in my diskman at a time meaning I had to constantly swap them in and out.When I hear a song I like I now have the ability to go and listen to other songs by an artist to see if I like what else they have.
That allows me to make an informed decision about whether I should buy them or not.
I get ALL the information rather then just what the radio thinks I should have.
With an MP3 player I can put only songs I like on and just have a random shuffle.If the music industry hadn't of been so anti-change, they might have been the ones to come up with an idea like the iTunes store.
If they had I bet things would have turned out very different.
Because they were making so much profit... Sorry, they were making so much "living" off CDs they didn't want to change.I'm a developer, I love what I do.
Sure I get paid, but it's pennies compared to what the software I write A) Saves my company and B) earns them in the end.
Kind of funny since my software is for research and is given away instead of sold.
You should love what you do and do it because you love it, not because you make tons of money for it.Why should an "artist" make more money then a doctor or a teacher.
I think they've been making a "living" for a very long time.
They're just bitter because now they can't waste hundreds of thousands on diamond encrusted watches anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29904883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898047</id>
	<title>Mandelscum</title>
	<author>AdmV0rl0n</author>
	<datestamp>1256747580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These bastards, and that slimy scumbag Mandelson have spend the past 13 years utterly ruining everything, every institution, way of life, habitat, hobby, social fabric and this?</p><p>Basically, people are slowly concluding a few things, some are less than good, but for every action, there is a reaction, clearly 13 years too late. Vote anyone but these bastards, and tell them why at every moment they bang on your door or come to your doorstep. Vote BNP, UKIP, Con, Lib - ANYONE but these slimy dark forces shits.</p><p>Their brand of nanny state 1984 insanity, and mass persecution of population, drivers, and all the rest, and their enforced political correctness and multiculturalism, and devolution, and EU fanatisism, and the rest is DEAD. OVER. FINISHED.</p><p>Its the worst government the UK has had in any modern times, and people cannot wait to be rid of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These bastards , and that slimy scumbag Mandelson have spend the past 13 years utterly ruining everything , every institution , way of life , habitat , hobby , social fabric and this ? Basically , people are slowly concluding a few things , some are less than good , but for every action , there is a reaction , clearly 13 years too late .
Vote anyone but these bastards , and tell them why at every moment they bang on your door or come to your doorstep .
Vote BNP , UKIP , Con , Lib - ANYONE but these slimy dark forces shits.Their brand of nanny state 1984 insanity , and mass persecution of population , drivers , and all the rest , and their enforced political correctness and multiculturalism , and devolution , and EU fanatisism , and the rest is DEAD .
OVER. FINISHED.Its the worst government the UK has had in any modern times , and people can not wait to be rid of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These bastards, and that slimy scumbag Mandelson have spend the past 13 years utterly ruining everything, every institution, way of life, habitat, hobby, social fabric and this?Basically, people are slowly concluding a few things, some are less than good, but for every action, there is a reaction, clearly 13 years too late.
Vote anyone but these bastards, and tell them why at every moment they bang on your door or come to your doorstep.
Vote BNP, UKIP, Con, Lib - ANYONE but these slimy dark forces shits.Their brand of nanny state 1984 insanity, and mass persecution of population, drivers, and all the rest, and their enforced political correctness and multiculturalism, and devolution, and EU fanatisism, and the rest is DEAD.
OVER. FINISHED.Its the worst government the UK has had in any modern times, and people cannot wait to be rid of them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897233</id>
	<title>Tagging</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1256744400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The airstripone tag seems more appropriate every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The airstripone tag seems more appropriate every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The airstripone tag seems more appropriate every day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897107</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1256743860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yeah they already know how absurd the law is; hence they'll make sure to include an exemption for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah they already know how absurd the law is ; hence they 'll make sure to include an exemption for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah they already know how absurd the law is; hence they'll make sure to include an exemption for themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901505</id>
	<title>Re:TOR</title>
	<author>DrVxD</author>
	<datestamp>1256762280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.</p></div><p>You mean like <a href="http://www.i2p2.de/" title="i2p2.de">I2P</a> [i2p2.de]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.You mean like I2P [ i2p2.de ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.You mean like I2P [i2p2.de]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898621</id>
	<title>easy answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An effective decentralized anonymity service will use encryption to mask contents and traffic destinations of communications across a network.  Think TOR or Freenet.</p><p>Anonymity systems become much more difficult for eavesdroppers to deal with as (a) more people use them, and (b) the contents of the networks diversify.  That is why this ruling is great news for anonymity services and privacy in general.  It will push more file sharers onto existing anonymity networks, and lead to the development of better systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An effective decentralized anonymity service will use encryption to mask contents and traffic destinations of communications across a network .
Think TOR or Freenet.Anonymity systems become much more difficult for eavesdroppers to deal with as ( a ) more people use them , and ( b ) the contents of the networks diversify .
That is why this ruling is great news for anonymity services and privacy in general .
It will push more file sharers onto existing anonymity networks , and lead to the development of better systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An effective decentralized anonymity service will use encryption to mask contents and traffic destinations of communications across a network.
Think TOR or Freenet.Anonymity systems become much more difficult for eavesdroppers to deal with as (a) more people use them, and (b) the contents of the networks diversify.
That is why this ruling is great news for anonymity services and privacy in general.
It will push more file sharers onto existing anonymity networks, and lead to the development of better systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899307</id>
	<title>What about leaked government data</title>
	<author>MtlDty</author>
	<datestamp>1256753220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I loved this section, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8328820.stm" title="bbc.co.uk">as found on the BBC</a> [bbc.co.uk]:<br>
<br>
<i>The pay-off for tough penalties against persistent file-sharers would be a more relaxed copyright regime, Mr Mandelson said. The details of it would need to be hammered out at European level but it would take account of the use of copyright material "at home and between friends", he said. It would mean that, for example, someone who has bought a CD would be able to copy it to their iPod or share it with family members without acting unlawfully.<br>
</i> <br>
So now we just need to find three instances that an MP shared any copyright material with a friend or colleague. Presumably accidentaly leaking millions of instances of personal details held in government databases doesnt count?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I loved this section , as found on the BBC [ bbc.co.uk ] : The pay-off for tough penalties against persistent file-sharers would be a more relaxed copyright regime , Mr Mandelson said .
The details of it would need to be hammered out at European level but it would take account of the use of copyright material " at home and between friends " , he said .
It would mean that , for example , someone who has bought a CD would be able to copy it to their iPod or share it with family members without acting unlawfully .
So now we just need to find three instances that an MP shared any copyright material with a friend or colleague .
Presumably accidentaly leaking millions of instances of personal details held in government databases doesnt count ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loved this section, as found on the BBC [bbc.co.uk]:

The pay-off for tough penalties against persistent file-sharers would be a more relaxed copyright regime, Mr Mandelson said.
The details of it would need to be hammered out at European level but it would take account of the use of copyright material "at home and between friends", he said.
It would mean that, for example, someone who has bought a CD would be able to copy it to their iPod or share it with family members without acting unlawfully.
So now we just need to find three instances that an MP shared any copyright material with a friend or colleague.
Presumably accidentaly leaking millions of instances of personal details held in government databases doesnt count?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905147</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256739240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'6 and out' is a common rule in backyard cricket</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'6 and out ' is a common rule in backyard cricket</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'6 and out' is a common rule in backyard cricket</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29906541</id>
	<title>Crypt-o-rama</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256750340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Military grade encryption here we come.  Users can use encryption too, and really if the government tries to seize equipment and then break the encryption, the government then can be charged for violating something like the DMCA, can't it?  Its interesting how vested interests are winning over common sense, common law and the best interests of the public.  Geffen of course has billions to gain from this.  But there would be no bribe, no 'gift in kind', noooo, nothing like that.  They talk about corruption in 3rd world countries with finger wagging disdain.  Now Robert Mugabe can say, with the biggest grin, "My Lord Peter Mandelson, what a fine example you set!".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Military grade encryption here we come .
Users can use encryption too , and really if the government tries to seize equipment and then break the encryption , the government then can be charged for violating something like the DMCA , ca n't it ?
Its interesting how vested interests are winning over common sense , common law and the best interests of the public .
Geffen of course has billions to gain from this .
But there would be no bribe , no 'gift in kind ' , noooo , nothing like that .
They talk about corruption in 3rd world countries with finger wagging disdain .
Now Robert Mugabe can say , with the biggest grin , " My Lord Peter Mandelson , what a fine example you set !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Military grade encryption here we come.
Users can use encryption too, and really if the government tries to seize equipment and then break the encryption, the government then can be charged for violating something like the DMCA, can't it?
Its interesting how vested interests are winning over common sense, common law and the best interests of the public.
Geffen of course has billions to gain from this.
But there would be no bribe, no 'gift in kind', noooo, nothing like that.
They talk about corruption in 3rd world countries with finger wagging disdain.
Now Robert Mugabe can say, with the biggest grin, "My Lord Peter Mandelson, what a fine example you set!
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903333</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>fabs64</author>
	<datestamp>1256728020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a 2 (or maybe 3) strikes rule for a head-high full toss.</p><p>Also there's a limit on the number of bouncers bowled in an over for an ODI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a 2 ( or maybe 3 ) strikes rule for a head-high full toss.Also there 's a limit on the number of bouncers bowled in an over for an ODI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a 2 (or maybe 3) strikes rule for a head-high full toss.Also there's a limit on the number of bouncers bowled in an over for an ODI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499</id>
	<title>Re:they need something based on the rules of crick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256745420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd been trying to make this joke all week, but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket, I couldn't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about.  Three strikes and I suppose now *I'm* out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd been trying to make this joke all week , but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket , I could n't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about .
Three strikes and I suppose now * I 'm * out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd been trying to make this joke all week, but despite reading the wiki page on Cricket, I couldn't write the joke to make it sound like I knew what I was talking about.
Three strikes and I suppose now *I'm* out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29923141</id>
	<title>Wireless Networks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256914560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of the<br>occupation government, they need to keep their wireless networks open.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of theoccupation government , they need to keep their wireless networks open .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If people in the UK do not want to be conscripted as soldiers of theoccupation government, they need to keep their wireless networks open.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898239</id>
	<title>3 strikes</title>
	<author>naeone</author>
	<datestamp>1256748480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>so p2p is now like the post office ???</htmltext>
<tokenext>so p2p is now like the post office ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so p2p is now like the post office ??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29947274</id>
	<title>Reply by Richard M Stallman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257096600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes that companies force book purchasers to identify themselves, so the company knows what books any person has bought.  This is what Amazon does now, and it is dangerous in itself.</p><p>See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle ("Kindle") is bad for your freedom.</p><p>rms</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes that companies force book purchasers to identify themselves , so the company knows what books any person has bought .
This is what Amazon does now , and it is dangerous in itself.See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle ( " Kindle " ) is bad for your freedom.rms</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea of using textual changes as watermarks presupposes that companies force book purchasers to identify themselves, so the company knows what books any person has bought.
This is what Amazon does now, and it is dangerous in itself.See DefectiveByDesign.org for other reasons why the Amazon Swindle ("Kindle") is bad for your freedom.rms</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139</id>
	<title>Why would anyone pirate Lily Allen anyway?</title>
	<author>twoshortplanks</author>
	<datestamp>1256744040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're in the UK you can play <a href="http://open.spotify.com/album/3hVR63Y2ElBoxmzThy80nG" title="spotify.com">her album</a> [spotify.com] for free on Spotify anyway...<p>(I'm being silly.  Of course I'll be contacting my MP about this.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're in the UK you can play her album [ spotify.com ] for free on Spotify anyway... ( I 'm being silly .
Of course I 'll be contacting my MP about this .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're in the UK you can play her album [spotify.com] for free on Spotify anyway...(I'm being silly.
Of course I'll be contacting my MP about this.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896957</id>
	<title>makes sense.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256743320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-anything- is worth it to stop folk listening to Lily Allen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-anything- is worth it to stop folk listening to Lily Allen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-anything- is worth it to stop folk listening to Lily Allen</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901551</id>
	<title>Re:Level of Responsibility</title>
	<author>DrVxD</author>
	<datestamp>1256762460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If one person in a family is accused of pirating, the whole household gets cut off?</p></div><p>Yes.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work, the whole company gets cut off?</p></div><p>Yes.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work, the whole ministry gets cut off?</p></div><p>No. Governments interpret laws as inconvenient when applied to themselves, and find routes around them...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If one person in a family is accused of pirating , the whole household gets cut off ? Yes.If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work , the whole company gets cut off ? Yes.If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work , the whole ministry gets cut off ? No .
Governments interpret laws as inconvenient when applied to themselves , and find routes around them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one person in a family is accused of pirating, the whole household gets cut off?Yes.If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work, the whole company gets cut off?Yes.If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work, the whole ministry gets cut off?No.
Governments interpret laws as inconvenient when applied to themselves, and find routes around them...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897801</id>
	<title>Why would they care about hampering terrorism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256746680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrorist attacks typically affect normal people. Copyright violations typically affect rich people. Guess which one they're more concerned with? Besides, increased terrorism means the plebs are more willing to give away whatever liberties they may have left in exchange for reassurances of safety.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorist attacks typically affect normal people .
Copyright violations typically affect rich people .
Guess which one they 're more concerned with ?
Besides , increased terrorism means the plebs are more willing to give away whatever liberties they may have left in exchange for reassurances of safety .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorist attacks typically affect normal people.
Copyright violations typically affect rich people.
Guess which one they're more concerned with?
Besides, increased terrorism means the plebs are more willing to give away whatever liberties they may have left in exchange for reassurances of safety.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907623</id>
	<title>Freenet!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256806980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Time for more people to use <a href="http://freenetproject.org/" title="freenetproject.org" rel="nofollow">Freenet</a> [freenetproject.org]! I just downloaded the film Up from it today and it would be difficult to find out that I did. Safe p2p.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Time for more people to use Freenet [ freenetproject.org ] !
I just downloaded the film Up from it today and it would be difficult to find out that I did .
Safe p2p .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time for more people to use Freenet [freenetproject.org]!
I just downloaded the film Up from it today and it would be difficult to find out that I did.
Safe p2p.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897989</id>
	<title>Re:Hey Britons</title>
	<author>Vanderhoth</author>
	<datestamp>1256747400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is a serious issue for everyone. I'm Canadian and I disagree with this being the fault of Britons, it's the fault of politicians. Before you know it this "Three strikes" rule will spread to Canada and to the US, especially if it "appears" to work in France and Briton.</p><p>Before I was able to download music, movies and other information I was locked into what was locally distributed. Someone else was deciding what I should have access to. I've discovered all kinds of new things I would have never even known existed. My policy is download to try, if I like it I try to buy it. And I have bought several movies and albums that weren't available here.</p><p>I don't want to go back to only having access to what someone else thinks I should like.</p><p> So, what I can the rest of us do to help stop this before it gets too out of hand?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is a serious issue for everyone .
I 'm Canadian and I disagree with this being the fault of Britons , it 's the fault of politicians .
Before you know it this " Three strikes " rule will spread to Canada and to the US , especially if it " appears " to work in France and Briton.Before I was able to download music , movies and other information I was locked into what was locally distributed .
Someone else was deciding what I should have access to .
I 've discovered all kinds of new things I would have never even known existed .
My policy is download to try , if I like it I try to buy it .
And I have bought several movies and albums that were n't available here.I do n't want to go back to only having access to what someone else thinks I should like .
So , what I can the rest of us do to help stop this before it gets too out of hand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is a serious issue for everyone.
I'm Canadian and I disagree with this being the fault of Britons, it's the fault of politicians.
Before you know it this "Three strikes" rule will spread to Canada and to the US, especially if it "appears" to work in France and Briton.Before I was able to download music, movies and other information I was locked into what was locally distributed.
Someone else was deciding what I should have access to.
I've discovered all kinds of new things I would have never even known existed.
My policy is download to try, if I like it I try to buy it.
And I have bought several movies and albums that weren't available here.I don't want to go back to only having access to what someone else thinks I should like.
So, what I can the rest of us do to help stop this before it gets too out of hand?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891</id>
	<title>they need something based on the rules of cricket</title>
	<author>ffflala</author>
	<datestamp>1256743080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US 3-strikes rule is based on a concept from baseball, and as a result probably makes little sense in the UK. I'm surprised they didn't go with something more appropriate, like a "bowled, leg-before-wicket, or hit-wicket" and you're out rule.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US 3-strikes rule is based on a concept from baseball , and as a result probably makes little sense in the UK .
I 'm surprised they did n't go with something more appropriate , like a " bowled , leg-before-wicket , or hit-wicket " and you 're out rule .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US 3-strikes rule is based on a concept from baseball, and as a result probably makes little sense in the UK.
I'm surprised they didn't go with something more appropriate, like a "bowled, leg-before-wicket, or hit-wicket" and you're out rule.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902931</id>
	<title>Wide Spread Encryption</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1256726040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231</id>
	<title>TOR</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know that TOR can already have P2P data streamed across it at the expense of the network, but honestly, I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.</p><p>I really think the government is chasing it's tail on this one.  "The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that TOR can already have P2P data streamed across it at the expense of the network , but honestly , I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.I really think the government is chasing it 's tail on this one .
" The Internet interprets censorship as damage , and routes around it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that TOR can already have P2P data streamed across it at the expense of the network, but honestly, I wonder how long it is before someone comes up with a purpose built anonymizing P2P system.I really think the government is chasing it's tail on this one.
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898021</id>
	<title>Re:Can't Wait</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256747460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them, three times, of copyright violations. Perhaps, once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world, they'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is. When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment, the possibilities of abuse are egregious.</p><p>Ah, the days of "innocent until proven guilty" seem like a distant memory now...</p></div><p>All that will happen from that is people who make these deliberately false accusations will go to jail.   For you know, terrorism.  Attacking the government and all.</p><p>So I'd suggest declining to engage in such behavior.  The only person who would be punished is yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them , three times , of copyright violations .
Perhaps , once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world , they 'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is .
When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment , the possibilities of abuse are egregious.Ah , the days of " innocent until proven guilty " seem like a distant memory now...All that will happen from that is people who make these deliberately false accusations will go to jail .
For you know , terrorism .
Attacking the government and all.So I 'd suggest declining to engage in such behavior .
The only person who would be punished is yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for some motivated group to deliver a clear message to politicians through a concerted effort to get politicians and their employees cut off from the internet simply by accusing them, three times, of copyright violations.
Perhaps, once politicians and their staff are cut off from the online world, they'll begin to realize just how moronic this law is.
When a simple accusation carries the weight of punishment, the possibilities of abuse are egregious.Ah, the days of "innocent until proven guilty" seem like a distant memory now...All that will happen from that is people who make these deliberately false accusations will go to jail.
For you know, terrorism.
Attacking the government and all.So I'd suggest declining to engage in such behavior.
The only person who would be punished is yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371</id>
	<title>Level of Responsibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If one person in a family is accused of pirating, the whole household gets cut off?</p><p>If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work, the whole company gets cut off?</p><p>If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work, the whole ministry gets cut off?</p><p>Who is \_allowed\_ to accuse?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If one person in a family is accused of pirating , the whole household gets cut off ? If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work , the whole company gets cut off ? If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work , the whole ministry gets cut off ? Who is \ _allowed \ _ to accuse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If one person in a family is accused of pirating, the whole household gets cut off?If one person in a company is accused of pirating while at work, the whole company gets cut off?If one person in a ministry is accused of pirating while at work, the whole ministry gets cut off?Who is \_allowed\_ to accuse?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567</id>
	<title>Why would P2P switch to encryption?</title>
	<author>will\_die</author>
	<datestamp>1256745780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If encryption becomes popular then I can see the point the police are making but why would people using P2P start using encryption to start the cycle?<br>
<br>
If everyone on P2P started encrypting the transportation it would make no difference because the arrests and letters to pay or else have not been caused by MITM sniffing.<br>
  If P2Pers start encrypting all files you have to have some method of getting the password out to everyone and that would require some club or private site and once you have that it is easier to get a legal right to inspect and copy all infomation on that site.  Such a site would have email address and other information about the users, so if anything this is something that P2Pers would avoid. <br>
The only place P2P where encryption would work is with blocking the IP address of the people sharing but that would require some central site that routes the traffic so it is not really P2P anymore.<br>
I don't really understand in depth how P2P works so what am I missing here?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If encryption becomes popular then I can see the point the police are making but why would people using P2P start using encryption to start the cycle ?
If everyone on P2P started encrypting the transportation it would make no difference because the arrests and letters to pay or else have not been caused by MITM sniffing .
If P2Pers start encrypting all files you have to have some method of getting the password out to everyone and that would require some club or private site and once you have that it is easier to get a legal right to inspect and copy all infomation on that site .
Such a site would have email address and other information about the users , so if anything this is something that P2Pers would avoid .
The only place P2P where encryption would work is with blocking the IP address of the people sharing but that would require some central site that routes the traffic so it is not really P2P anymore .
I do n't really understand in depth how P2P works so what am I missing here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If encryption becomes popular then I can see the point the police are making but why would people using P2P start using encryption to start the cycle?
If everyone on P2P started encrypting the transportation it would make no difference because the arrests and letters to pay or else have not been caused by MITM sniffing.
If P2Pers start encrypting all files you have to have some method of getting the password out to everyone and that would require some club or private site and once you have that it is easier to get a legal right to inspect and copy all infomation on that site.
Such a site would have email address and other information about the users, so if anything this is something that P2Pers would avoid.
The only place P2P where encryption would work is with blocking the IP address of the people sharing but that would require some central site that routes the traffic so it is not really P2P anymore.
I don't really understand in depth how P2P works so what am I missing here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900721
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897989
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903603
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907497
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898621
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901617
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897215
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897401
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897385
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901505
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897131
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897523
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897383
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29904883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898403
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897095
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897415
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898877
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_28_1344203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897193
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897263
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897523
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897989
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897231
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907123
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897383
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897131
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897377
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898693
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897499
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29905759
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903333
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29907497
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901617
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901551
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898547
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898189
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897215
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897401
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898649
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900721
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908211
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900629
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902509
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29903603
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897415
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898877
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899249
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29900131
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896853
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898403
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29901503
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898047
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29904883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29908073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29896903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899027
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_28_1344203.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897153
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898199
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29899029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29898021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29897385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_28_1344203.29902953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
