<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_27_2035244</id>
	<title>In AU, Film Studios Issue Ultimatum To ISPs</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259316660000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>bennyboy64 writes <i>"The Australian <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/03/27/1830259/Australian-ISP-Argues-For-BitTorrent-Users">court case</a> between the film industry and ISP iiNet drew to a close yesterday after the <a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/161447,day-22-film-studios-issue-ultimatum-to-isps.aspx">film studios issued an ultimatum</a>: Take copyright responsibilities seriously or leave the industry. 'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer. 'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.' iTnews has done a short <a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/161488,iinet-ceo-heads-back-into-the-real-job.aspx">one minute interview with iiNet's CEO Michael Malone</a> as he left the court on the final day. Also on the final day, the judge <a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/161429,day-22-iia-attempt-to-intervene-in-iinet-copyright-case-dismissed.aspx">dismissed the Internet Industry Association's involvement</a> in the case."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>bennyboy64 writes " The Australian court case between the film industry and ISP iiNet drew to a close yesterday after the film studios issued an ultimatum : Take copyright responsibilities seriously or leave the industry .
'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit .
But it carries with it a responsibility, ' said Tony Bannon SC , the film industry 's lawyer .
'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .
If they do n't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business .
' iTnews has done a short one minute interview with iiNet 's CEO Michael Malone as he left the court on the final day .
Also on the final day , the judge dismissed the Internet Industry Association 's involvement in the case .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bennyboy64 writes "The Australian court case between the film industry and ISP iiNet drew to a close yesterday after the film studios issued an ultimatum: Take copyright responsibilities seriously or leave the industry.
'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit.
But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer.
'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.
If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.
' iTnews has done a short one minute interview with iiNet's CEO Michael Malone as he left the court on the final day.
Also on the final day, the judge dismissed the Internet Industry Association's involvement in the case.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250692</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>speed of lightx2</author>
	<datestamp>1259325720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Canada there is a blanket tax for all Cd-R's that goes to the record companies. If you guy a blank CD in Canada, your automatically considered to be copyright thief (at least probabilistically), or as some other people prefer to think about it, you already paid for your right to pirate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Canada there is a blanket tax for all Cd-R 's that goes to the record companies .
If you guy a blank CD in Canada , your automatically considered to be copyright thief ( at least probabilistically ) , or as some other people prefer to think about it , you already paid for your right to pirate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Canada there is a blanket tax for all Cd-R's that goes to the record companies.
If you guy a blank CD in Canada, your automatically considered to be copyright thief (at least probabilistically), or as some other people prefer to think about it, you already paid for your right to pirate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259323800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b> <i>"If an ISP in a case says &lsquo;this is what we tried to do, we tried to deal with notices and these are the systems we use. We cant deal with every one' - let's assume [the ISP] get 100 of these notices per week and tried to process 25 percent of them.
<br> <br>
"So they come to court and say &lsquo;this is our reasonable response'. That may be one thing," Bannon hypothesised.
<br>v
"But in circumstances where they do nothing, where they say they can't send a single notice to anybody....</i> <br> <br> </b>

I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but...<br> <br>

You didn't RTFA.  The above italic is from the article.  They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all.  All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it  In all honesty, this does seem reasonable, provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports..<br> <br>

The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either, in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service.  You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again, including if it needs repairs.  An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship. You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection. When it goes out, you contact your provider, and don't talk to a 3rd party shop, etc.  Apples to oranges.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If an ISP in a case says    this is what we tried to do , we tried to deal with notices and these are the systems we use .
We cant deal with every one ' - let 's assume [ the ISP ] get 100 of these notices per week and tried to process 25 percent of them .
" So they come to court and say    this is our reasonable response' .
That may be one thing , " Bannon hypothesised .
v " But in circumstances where they do nothing , where they say they ca n't send a single notice to anybody... . I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but.. . You did n't RTFA .
The above italic is from the article .
They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all .
All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement , the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty , this does seem reasonable , provided they do n't flood their offices with garbage reports. . The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either , in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service .
You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again , including if it needs repairs .
An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship .
You pay a company monthly ( in most cases ) for a connection .
When it goes out , you contact your provider , and do n't talk to a 3rd party shop , etc .
Apples to oranges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "If an ISP in a case says ‘this is what we tried to do, we tried to deal with notices and these are the systems we use.
We cant deal with every one' - let's assume [the ISP] get 100 of these notices per week and tried to process 25 percent of them.
"So they come to court and say ‘this is our reasonable response'.
That may be one thing," Bannon hypothesised.
v
"But in circumstances where they do nothing, where they say they can't send a single notice to anybody....   

I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but... 

You didn't RTFA.
The above italic is from the article.
They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all.
All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it  In all honesty, this does seem reasonable, provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports.. 

The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either, in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service.
You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again, including if it needs repairs.
An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship.
You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection.
When it goes out, you contact your provider, and don't talk to a 3rd party shop, etc.
Apples to oranges.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050</id>
	<title>Re:Post Office</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1259327820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not saying it's perfect, but it points out how this kind of rule is somewhat absurd. If the ISPs were directing customers to the illegal content, the argument would make perfect sense. But when acting as a simple data carrier, the argument doesn't hold water. You can't sue the post office. You can't sue AT&amp;T because you called a scam company and told them your credit card. You can't sue Comcast because ABC news aired a report that upset you.
</p><p>Now, it's illegal to use the post office for various crimes (thus postal fraud), and we could get laws like that. But asking the post office to inspect every letter/package sent to make sure it doesn't contain something illegal would be rejected outright. It's somewhat easier for ISPs since they don't need to physically open boxes/letters, but it is still a rather ridiculous request.
</p><p>Your torrent site example is interesting, but those are basically catalogs. In a post office world, you sent a letter to the site asking for a catalog, and the post office sent it to you. The ISP is still a dumb pipe. Pretend that Colombia House used to sell pirated content. It's the same thing. Colombia house can get in trouble for doing it, and for using the post office to transport stolen goods, but the USPS (or UPS/FedEx if you prefer) isn't liable.
</p><p>The best argument I could see against the ISPs is that they often advertise that their high speed connections will make online video better. If you assume most online video is stolen, they are technically advertising for it, but that's a stretch. There is tons of free video on YouTube that isn't stolen (cat clips, etc.), and free to view services (Hulu, etc.) that this doesn't hold water.
</p><p>I always thought it was odd that the big ISPs advertised how their service was great for downloading music/MP3s years after the file sharing lawsuits started. "You can download MP3s 200x faster than dial-up! (but downloading 200x as many legal MP3s will cost you 200x as much)".
</p><p>Now the argument that you would change your connection if you didn't download pirated content may hold true for you, but for many people it wouldn't. My parents don't download illegal stuff, but they like their high speed connection. As legal options increase (again Hulu, Amazon's service, iTunes, etc.) people have good reasons to want to keep high speed connections. Even for downloading family videos sent by other relatives/etc.
</p><p>The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe. They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe, and priced like a dumb pipe. But they are trying <i>so hard</i> to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service "X". Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up, they go back to "You can't sue us, we're a dumb pipe". i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not saying it 's perfect , but it points out how this kind of rule is somewhat absurd .
If the ISPs were directing customers to the illegal content , the argument would make perfect sense .
But when acting as a simple data carrier , the argument does n't hold water .
You ca n't sue the post office .
You ca n't sue AT&amp;T because you called a scam company and told them your credit card .
You ca n't sue Comcast because ABC news aired a report that upset you .
Now , it 's illegal to use the post office for various crimes ( thus postal fraud ) , and we could get laws like that .
But asking the post office to inspect every letter/package sent to make sure it does n't contain something illegal would be rejected outright .
It 's somewhat easier for ISPs since they do n't need to physically open boxes/letters , but it is still a rather ridiculous request .
Your torrent site example is interesting , but those are basically catalogs .
In a post office world , you sent a letter to the site asking for a catalog , and the post office sent it to you .
The ISP is still a dumb pipe .
Pretend that Colombia House used to sell pirated content .
It 's the same thing .
Colombia house can get in trouble for doing it , and for using the post office to transport stolen goods , but the USPS ( or UPS/FedEx if you prefer ) is n't liable .
The best argument I could see against the ISPs is that they often advertise that their high speed connections will make online video better .
If you assume most online video is stolen , they are technically advertising for it , but that 's a stretch .
There is tons of free video on YouTube that is n't stolen ( cat clips , etc .
) , and free to view services ( Hulu , etc .
) that this does n't hold water .
I always thought it was odd that the big ISPs advertised how their service was great for downloading music/MP3s years after the file sharing lawsuits started .
" You can download MP3s 200x faster than dial-up !
( but downloading 200x as many legal MP3s will cost you 200x as much ) " .
Now the argument that you would change your connection if you did n't download pirated content may hold true for you , but for many people it would n't .
My parents do n't download illegal stuff , but they like their high speed connection .
As legal options increase ( again Hulu , Amazon 's service , iTunes , etc .
) people have good reasons to want to keep high speed connections .
Even for downloading family videos sent by other relatives/etc .
The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe .
They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe , and priced like a dumb pipe .
But they are trying so hard to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service " X " .
Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up , they go back to " You ca n't sue us , we 're a dumb pipe " .
i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not saying it's perfect, but it points out how this kind of rule is somewhat absurd.
If the ISPs were directing customers to the illegal content, the argument would make perfect sense.
But when acting as a simple data carrier, the argument doesn't hold water.
You can't sue the post office.
You can't sue AT&amp;T because you called a scam company and told them your credit card.
You can't sue Comcast because ABC news aired a report that upset you.
Now, it's illegal to use the post office for various crimes (thus postal fraud), and we could get laws like that.
But asking the post office to inspect every letter/package sent to make sure it doesn't contain something illegal would be rejected outright.
It's somewhat easier for ISPs since they don't need to physically open boxes/letters, but it is still a rather ridiculous request.
Your torrent site example is interesting, but those are basically catalogs.
In a post office world, you sent a letter to the site asking for a catalog, and the post office sent it to you.
The ISP is still a dumb pipe.
Pretend that Colombia House used to sell pirated content.
It's the same thing.
Colombia house can get in trouble for doing it, and for using the post office to transport stolen goods, but the USPS (or UPS/FedEx if you prefer) isn't liable.
The best argument I could see against the ISPs is that they often advertise that their high speed connections will make online video better.
If you assume most online video is stolen, they are technically advertising for it, but that's a stretch.
There is tons of free video on YouTube that isn't stolen (cat clips, etc.
), and free to view services (Hulu, etc.
) that this doesn't hold water.
I always thought it was odd that the big ISPs advertised how their service was great for downloading music/MP3s years after the file sharing lawsuits started.
"You can download MP3s 200x faster than dial-up!
(but downloading 200x as many legal MP3s will cost you 200x as much)".
Now the argument that you would change your connection if you didn't download pirated content may hold true for you, but for many people it wouldn't.
My parents don't download illegal stuff, but they like their high speed connection.
As legal options increase (again Hulu, Amazon's service, iTunes, etc.
) people have good reasons to want to keep high speed connections.
Even for downloading family videos sent by other relatives/etc.
The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe.
They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe, and priced like a dumb pipe.
But they are trying so hard to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service "X".
Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up, they go back to "You can't sue us, we're a dumb pipe".
i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250282</id>
	<title>Typical of Movie Industry Corporates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259323380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These corporates which run the big movie studios have no creative cells between any of them. They've run out of ideas and are now churning out old remakes, as well as copying ideas from more talented directors and producers out there (How many disaster/war/tween movies do we want anyway?!?).<br>Instead of working on ideas and business models to facilitate new technology and new media, they continually insist on suing customers, vaguely related industries (The earlier VCR comment is valid, just replace with Blueray)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These corporates which run the big movie studios have no creative cells between any of them .
They 've run out of ideas and are now churning out old remakes , as well as copying ideas from more talented directors and producers out there ( How many disaster/war/tween movies do we want anyway ? ! ?
) .Instead of working on ideas and business models to facilitate new technology and new media , they continually insist on suing customers , vaguely related industries ( The earlier VCR comment is valid , just replace with Blueray )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These corporates which run the big movie studios have no creative cells between any of them.
They've run out of ideas and are now churning out old remakes, as well as copying ideas from more talented directors and producers out there (How many disaster/war/tween movies do we want anyway?!?
).Instead of working on ideas and business models to facilitate new technology and new media, they continually insist on suing customers, vaguely related industries (The earlier VCR comment is valid, just replace with Blueray)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30256326</id>
	<title>Re:Actually, I think the ISPs should fully agree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259441820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point you're missing is: why should the ISPs care whether the music/film industry stays in business. Blocking the content would ruin their own business, and ruining the content producer's business even more is not a good reason to do it. After all, they aren't some kind of mortal enemies...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point you 're missing is : why should the ISPs care whether the music/film industry stays in business .
Blocking the content would ruin their own business , and ruining the content producer 's business even more is not a good reason to do it .
After all , they are n't some kind of mortal enemies.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point you're missing is: why should the ISPs care whether the music/film industry stays in business.
Blocking the content would ruin their own business, and ruining the content producer's business even more is not a good reason to do it.
After all, they aren't some kind of mortal enemies...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251108</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1259328180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If they had to get $1000 per request, they would be profiting off of piracy.</p> </div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or police from crime?

</p><p> You are taking it in silly direction.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had to get $ 1000 per request , they would be profiting off of piracy .
... or police from crime ?
You are taking it in silly direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If they had to get $1000 per request, they would be profiting off of piracy.
... or police from crime?
You are taking it in silly direction.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30261712</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>Anonymous Hermit</author>
	<datestamp>1259513700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly. Until a court admits the evidence presented, no one can say if the evidence is good enough. An ISP can't be expected to act on "evidence" without a court order. You want to sue John Doe, you take them to court - end of story.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Until a court admits the evidence presented , no one can say if the evidence is good enough .
An ISP ca n't be expected to act on " evidence " without a court order .
You want to sue John Doe , you take them to court - end of story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Until a court admits the evidence presented, no one can say if the evidence is good enough.
An ISP can't be expected to act on "evidence" without a court order.
You want to sue John Doe, you take them to court - end of story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249960</id>
	<title>Where's the ultimatum?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds more like whining to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds more like whining to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds more like whining to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253438</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259405760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>$1000 is excessive but $100 each is not.</i> </p><p>Why? The content industry set the standard for unconscionably high statutory payments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 1000 is excessive but $ 100 each is not .
Why ? The content industry set the standard for unconscionably high statutory payments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$1000 is excessive but $100 each is not.
Why? The content industry set the standard for unconscionably high statutory payments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255404</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>WeeBit</author>
	<datestamp>1259433180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unless the ISP's find a way to make money off of the music and film industry's blunders. I would be sending the film and music industry's a bill for services provided.  If they don't like that, then they can get out of the business of music and film.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless the ISP 's find a way to make money off of the music and film industry 's blunders .
I would be sending the film and music industry 's a bill for services provided .
If they do n't like that , then they can get out of the business of music and film .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless the ISP's find a way to make money off of the music and film industry's blunders.
I would be sending the film and music industry's a bill for services provided.
If they don't like that, then they can get out of the business of music and film.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30265368</id>
	<title>Ultimatum?</title>
	<author>tru3ntropy</author>
	<datestamp>1259505660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't an ultimatum imply some sort of threat, like we will destroy you; not we will suggest that you get out of the industry?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't an ultimatum imply some sort of threat , like we will destroy you ; not we will suggest that you get out of the industry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't an ultimatum imply some sort of threat, like we will destroy you; not we will suggest that you get out of the industry?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250646</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>LeperPuppet</author>
	<datestamp>1259325480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I also think ISPs should pass along infringement notices, assuming that the copyright holders can provide evidence that the ISPs customer has been infringing on their copyright.  ISPs however shouldn't have to foot the bill for enforcing the copyrights of others, especially those who have a history of making poorly supported accusations of infringement.

</p><p>
If a copyright holder can produce actual evidence of the transfer of a complete film/TV episode/whatever by an ISPs customer, then the ISP should forward the notice and charge the copyrights holder for any processing costs incurred.  If the copyright holder eventually takes the customer to court, they can try to recoup this cost from them.  This way if they're accusing actual infringers, they'll recoup their outlay, while if they're accusing network printers, they won't.

</p><p>
If the copyright holders won't do a thorough and respectable job of investigating potential infringements, why should they expect others to do so for free on their behalf?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I also think ISPs should pass along infringement notices , assuming that the copyright holders can provide evidence that the ISPs customer has been infringing on their copyright .
ISPs however should n't have to foot the bill for enforcing the copyrights of others , especially those who have a history of making poorly supported accusations of infringement .
If a copyright holder can produce actual evidence of the transfer of a complete film/TV episode/whatever by an ISPs customer , then the ISP should forward the notice and charge the copyrights holder for any processing costs incurred .
If the copyright holder eventually takes the customer to court , they can try to recoup this cost from them .
This way if they 're accusing actual infringers , they 'll recoup their outlay , while if they 're accusing network printers , they wo n't .
If the copyright holders wo n't do a thorough and respectable job of investigating potential infringements , why should they expect others to do so for free on their behalf ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I also think ISPs should pass along infringement notices, assuming that the copyright holders can provide evidence that the ISPs customer has been infringing on their copyright.
ISPs however shouldn't have to foot the bill for enforcing the copyrights of others, especially those who have a history of making poorly supported accusations of infringement.
If a copyright holder can produce actual evidence of the transfer of a complete film/TV episode/whatever by an ISPs customer, then the ISP should forward the notice and charge the copyrights holder for any processing costs incurred.
If the copyright holder eventually takes the customer to court, they can try to recoup this cost from them.
This way if they're accusing actual infringers, they'll recoup their outlay, while if they're accusing network printers, they won't.
If the copyright holders won't do a thorough and respectable job of investigating potential infringements, why should they expect others to do so for free on their behalf?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250340</id>
	<title>STFU studios and GBTW</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259323740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it carries no responsibility because ISP's are common carriers.  The only thing anyone is responsible for here is studios. They need to STFU and get back to work making films. The moment these idiots became more law firm than film studio they ceased to provide anything useful to society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it carries no responsibility because ISP 's are common carriers .
The only thing anyone is responsible for here is studios .
They need to STFU and get back to work making films .
The moment these idiots became more law firm than film studio they ceased to provide anything useful to society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it carries no responsibility because ISP's are common carriers.
The only thing anyone is responsible for here is studios.
They need to STFU and get back to work making films.
The moment these idiots became more law firm than film studio they ceased to provide anything useful to society.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30258518</id>
	<title>leave the industry</title>
	<author>amoeba1911</author>
	<datestamp>1259423340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I like it a lot: "leave the industry" is a very good advice, they should follow their own advice.
</p><p>
They already made huge profits and continue to make huge profits despite worldwide recession. Over the past few decades the copyright law has been assaulted repeatedly for their sake and we have to endure a nearly infinite copyright term, along with DMCA, DRM and other bullshit just for their sake. If they feel their business is still being treated unfairly and they can't make enough profits to continue then they should leave the industry. The door is wide open, the message is crystal clear: "by all means please feel free to GTFO anytime you like."
</p><p>
They will not be missed: the void they create would be filled instantly by more creators who don't have such draconian views of content control, ie. people who are out to make art, not a quick buck.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like it a lot : " leave the industry " is a very good advice , they should follow their own advice .
They already made huge profits and continue to make huge profits despite worldwide recession .
Over the past few decades the copyright law has been assaulted repeatedly for their sake and we have to endure a nearly infinite copyright term , along with DMCA , DRM and other bullshit just for their sake .
If they feel their business is still being treated unfairly and they ca n't make enough profits to continue then they should leave the industry .
The door is wide open , the message is crystal clear : " by all means please feel free to GTFO anytime you like .
" They will not be missed : the void they create would be filled instantly by more creators who do n't have such draconian views of content control , ie .
people who are out to make art , not a quick buck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I like it a lot: "leave the industry" is a very good advice, they should follow their own advice.
They already made huge profits and continue to make huge profits despite worldwide recession.
Over the past few decades the copyright law has been assaulted repeatedly for their sake and we have to endure a nearly infinite copyright term, along with DMCA, DRM and other bullshit just for their sake.
If they feel their business is still being treated unfairly and they can't make enough profits to continue then they should leave the industry.
The door is wide open, the message is crystal clear: "by all means please feel free to GTFO anytime you like.
"

They will not be missed: the void they create would be filled instantly by more creators who don't have such draconian views of content control, ie.
people who are out to make art, not a quick buck.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250990</id>
	<title>Thats a plea of a dying</title>
	<author>future assassin</author>
	<datestamp>1259327520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>mega industry and I welcome it. I always wondered why they never went after the computer, mobile device and networking equipment manufacturers. After all they are the first in line before the network line but they insists on badgering the ISP's.</htmltext>
<tokenext>mega industry and I welcome it .
I always wondered why they never went after the computer , mobile device and networking equipment manufacturers .
After all they are the first in line before the network line but they insists on badgering the ISP 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mega industry and I welcome it.
I always wondered why they never went after the computer, mobile device and networking equipment manufacturers.
After all they are the first in line before the network line but they insists on badgering the ISP's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251184</id>
	<title>Re:Same old song.</title>
	<author>easyTree</author>
	<datestamp>1259328540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their job is producing shitty movies, snorting coke and strong-arming $5000 out of each of their customers, <b>not</b> ensuring that their artificially-created-shortage-of-product distribution system isn't totally borked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their job is producing shitty movies , snorting coke and strong-arming $ 5000 out of each of their customers , not ensuring that their artificially-created-shortage-of-product distribution system is n't totally borked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their job is producing shitty movies, snorting coke and strong-arming $5000 out of each of their customers, not ensuring that their artificially-created-shortage-of-product distribution system isn't totally borked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251512</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, so?</title>
	<author>myowntrueself</author>
	<datestamp>1259331480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You really believe that in a democracy it is the elected government that ultimately wields power?</p><p>How do you think that government got elected? You think that if the media corporations were against them, they'd stand a chance of being elected?</p><p>Next you will be saying that advertising doesn't work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You really believe that in a democracy it is the elected government that ultimately wields power ? How do you think that government got elected ?
You think that if the media corporations were against them , they 'd stand a chance of being elected ? Next you will be saying that advertising does n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really believe that in a democracy it is the elected government that ultimately wields power?How do you think that government got elected?
You think that if the media corporations were against them, they'd stand a chance of being elected?Next you will be saying that advertising doesn't work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253298</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259402040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next: Castrate all men. To remove their &ldquo;facility&rdquo; to rape women.</p><p>(Oh boy, I know that there are &ldquo;battle tank butch&rdquo; lesbians out there, who think I&rsquo;m completely serious. ^^)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next : Castrate all men .
To remove their    facility    to rape women .
( Oh boy , I know that there are    battle tank butch    lesbians out there , who think I    m completely serious .
^ ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next: Castrate all men.
To remove their “facility” to rape women.
(Oh boy, I know that there are “battle tank butch” lesbians out there, who think I’m completely serious.
^^)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253306</id>
	<title>Re:Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259402340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just founded the NRLA, you insensitive clod!<br>We plan to merge with the <a href="http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/pix/Lustiges/wtfs/Gay\%20black\%20jewish\%20klansmen\%20for\%20tolerance\%20and\%20understanding.\%20\%E2\%80\%94\%20My\%20head.\%20It\%20just\%20exploded.jpg" title="radiantempire.com">GaBJeKTaU</a> [radiantempire.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just founded the NRLA , you insensitive clod ! We plan to merge with the GaBJeKTaU [ radiantempire.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just founded the NRLA, you insensitive clod!We plan to merge with the GaBJeKTaU [radiantempire.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252752</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259347740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.</i> </p><p>You don't go far enough. Expect a mass exodus when people find that copy machines, pens, pencils, paper, chisels, clay tablets and vocal cords are also banned as infraction-enabling devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next stop , having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .
You do n't go far enough .
Expect a mass exodus when people find that copy machines , pens , pencils , paper , chisels , clay tablets and vocal cords are also banned as infraction-enabling devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.
You don't go far enough.
Expect a mass exodus when people find that copy machines, pens, pencils, paper, chisels, clay tablets and vocal cords are also banned as infraction-enabling devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250280</id>
	<title>How is this a logical argument?</title>
	<author>firesyde424</author>
	<datestamp>1259323380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business."</p><p>Does this mean that Dell and HP should get out of the computer manufacturing business because they provide a device that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes?  You might as well sue the oil companies because they provide the gasoline that powers the automobiles used in vehicular homicide.</p><p>Why am I suddenly curious about the annual revenue of iiNet?  Something tells me that iiNet probably can't afford a protracted legal battle in the way that say... Dell or AT&amp;T could.</p><p>The MAFIAA may change names and countries, but the bullshit is still the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .
If they do n't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business .
" Does this mean that Dell and HP should get out of the computer manufacturing business because they provide a device that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes ?
You might as well sue the oil companies because they provide the gasoline that powers the automobiles used in vehicular homicide.Why am I suddenly curious about the annual revenue of iiNet ?
Something tells me that iiNet probably ca n't afford a protracted legal battle in the way that say... Dell or AT&amp;T could.The MAFIAA may change names and countries , but the bullshit is still the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.
If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.
"Does this mean that Dell and HP should get out of the computer manufacturing business because they provide a device that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes?
You might as well sue the oil companies because they provide the gasoline that powers the automobiles used in vehicular homicide.Why am I suddenly curious about the annual revenue of iiNet?
Something tells me that iiNet probably can't afford a protracted legal battle in the way that say... Dell or AT&amp;T could.The MAFIAA may change names and countries, but the bullshit is still the same.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250680</id>
	<title>If you don't like this...</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1259325660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... then cut off the stream that lets these studios think they can dictate to ISPs.</p><p>In other words:</p><p><strong>Stop buying their crap</strong>, and encourage others to do the same.</p><p>Now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... then cut off the stream that lets these studios think they can dictate to ISPs.In other words : Stop buying their crap , and encourage others to do the same.Now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... then cut off the stream that lets these studios think they can dictate to ISPs.In other words:Stop buying their crap, and encourage others to do the same.Now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252856</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1259349720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't even suggest that $1000 is excessive.  To get an admin with half a clue to sift through logs and investigate a user's activities properly, the billable rate is probably a couple of hundred per hour (company charging rate, not what the admin gets).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't even suggest that $ 1000 is excessive .
To get an admin with half a clue to sift through logs and investigate a user 's activities properly , the billable rate is probably a couple of hundred per hour ( company charging rate , not what the admin gets ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't even suggest that $1000 is excessive.
To get an admin with half a clue to sift through logs and investigate a user's activities properly, the billable rate is probably a couple of hundred per hour (company charging rate, not what the admin gets).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250808</id>
	<title>Those brave souls protecting film copyright......</title>
	<author>taksraven</author>
	<datestamp>1259326200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What has always annoyed me about this case has been the fact that iinet has been at the rough end of it, despite the fact that it has only been the third biggest ISP in Australia.  Telstra and Optus, (The two biggest ISP's in Australia and the two that really have the funds to mount a legal defence against this sort of case) the real targets of this legal action, have been sitting at the sidelines rubbing their hands together with glee probably hoping that this legal action will topple iinet and give them more customers.  Those prosecuting iinet would have seen this as a "cost-effective test case", in other words, they are picking on those who do not have the best ability to pay to defend themselves in court.

I hope that somehow iinet wins this case, but even if they do, with mininova going bye-byes yesterday, the writing might be on the wall for bittorrent and the like.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What has always annoyed me about this case has been the fact that iinet has been at the rough end of it , despite the fact that it has only been the third biggest ISP in Australia .
Telstra and Optus , ( The two biggest ISP 's in Australia and the two that really have the funds to mount a legal defence against this sort of case ) the real targets of this legal action , have been sitting at the sidelines rubbing their hands together with glee probably hoping that this legal action will topple iinet and give them more customers .
Those prosecuting iinet would have seen this as a " cost-effective test case " , in other words , they are picking on those who do not have the best ability to pay to defend themselves in court .
I hope that somehow iinet wins this case , but even if they do , with mininova going bye-byes yesterday , the writing might be on the wall for bittorrent and the like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What has always annoyed me about this case has been the fact that iinet has been at the rough end of it, despite the fact that it has only been the third biggest ISP in Australia.
Telstra and Optus, (The two biggest ISP's in Australia and the two that really have the funds to mount a legal defence against this sort of case) the real targets of this legal action, have been sitting at the sidelines rubbing their hands together with glee probably hoping that this legal action will topple iinet and give them more customers.
Those prosecuting iinet would have seen this as a "cost-effective test case", in other words, they are picking on those who do not have the best ability to pay to defend themselves in court.
I hope that somehow iinet wins this case, but even if they do, with mininova going bye-byes yesterday, the writing might be on the wall for bittorrent and the like.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30279016</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259599200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But it carries with it a responsibility.</i> </p><p>Sure. And who should define that responsibility?</p><p>Their competition?</p><p>Someone who wants to evade legal requirements by buying judges who will meet them in ex parte proceedings?</p><p>A disinterested third party?</p><p>A sanctimonious asshole like you?</p><p>Nice -- captcha = contempt</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But it carries with it a responsibility .
Sure. And who should define that responsibility ? Their competition ? Someone who wants to evade legal requirements by buying judges who will meet them in ex parte proceedings ? A disinterested third party ? A sanctimonious asshole like you ? Nice -- captcha = contempt</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it carries with it a responsibility.
Sure. And who should define that responsibility?Their competition?Someone who wants to evade legal requirements by buying judges who will meet them in ex parte proceedings?A disinterested third party?A sanctimonious asshole like you?Nice -- captcha = contempt</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249876</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>PizzaAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1259321220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In pizza business it's quite common thing to be nice towards your customers. If I get a copyright notice from MPAA after serving my customer a pizza, I wont just take that pizza away. He can continue eating it until court orders me to stop providing food for the guy. But even if I have to stop providing him food, I will continue providing him mountain dew. If the ISP is also a mobile phone operator and is ordered to cut the customer, it should only affect the service in question.<br>
<br>
The thing is, I'm a common carrier when I'm delivering pizzas as a pizza delivery guy. It is not my responsibility to handle what the customer has ordered in his pizza. Yes, I hate mushrooms in pizza. I prefer bacon. I would even suggest ordering bacon with lots of cheese over mushrooms. But if thats what the customer wants, it is not my responsibility to interfere with that. Or even know what toppings he ordered.<br>
<br>
When MPAA gets close to our pizza business, we WILL stand up and fight in court. We WILL defend our hungry customers. We WILL defend the freedom to eat pizza and drink mountain dew while raiding the latest badass boss in World of Warcraft. They aren't going to take our freedom away!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In pizza business it 's quite common thing to be nice towards your customers .
If I get a copyright notice from MPAA after serving my customer a pizza , I wont just take that pizza away .
He can continue eating it until court orders me to stop providing food for the guy .
But even if I have to stop providing him food , I will continue providing him mountain dew .
If the ISP is also a mobile phone operator and is ordered to cut the customer , it should only affect the service in question .
The thing is , I 'm a common carrier when I 'm delivering pizzas as a pizza delivery guy .
It is not my responsibility to handle what the customer has ordered in his pizza .
Yes , I hate mushrooms in pizza .
I prefer bacon .
I would even suggest ordering bacon with lots of cheese over mushrooms .
But if thats what the customer wants , it is not my responsibility to interfere with that .
Or even know what toppings he ordered .
When MPAA gets close to our pizza business , we WILL stand up and fight in court .
We WILL defend our hungry customers .
We WILL defend the freedom to eat pizza and drink mountain dew while raiding the latest badass boss in World of Warcraft .
They are n't going to take our freedom away !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In pizza business it's quite common thing to be nice towards your customers.
If I get a copyright notice from MPAA after serving my customer a pizza, I wont just take that pizza away.
He can continue eating it until court orders me to stop providing food for the guy.
But even if I have to stop providing him food, I will continue providing him mountain dew.
If the ISP is also a mobile phone operator and is ordered to cut the customer, it should only affect the service in question.
The thing is, I'm a common carrier when I'm delivering pizzas as a pizza delivery guy.
It is not my responsibility to handle what the customer has ordered in his pizza.
Yes, I hate mushrooms in pizza.
I prefer bacon.
I would even suggest ordering bacon with lots of cheese over mushrooms.
But if thats what the customer wants, it is not my responsibility to interfere with that.
Or even know what toppings he ordered.
When MPAA gets close to our pizza business, we WILL stand up and fight in court.
We WILL defend our hungry customers.
We WILL defend the freedom to eat pizza and drink mountain dew while raiding the latest badass boss in World of Warcraft.
They aren't going to take our freedom away!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250582</id>
	<title>Isn't it about time for "common carrier" status?</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1259325120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ISPs are not far off from phone companies in the sense that they just carry traffic.  While it's true that there are presently games being played with port blocking, applications blocking and bandwidth limiting, if given the option of becoming a common carrier makes them immune to the pressures of the copyright industry, then that's the way it should be.  They would also likely stop playing games with the port blocking and all that mess as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISPs are not far off from phone companies in the sense that they just carry traffic .
While it 's true that there are presently games being played with port blocking , applications blocking and bandwidth limiting , if given the option of becoming a common carrier makes them immune to the pressures of the copyright industry , then that 's the way it should be .
They would also likely stop playing games with the port blocking and all that mess as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISPs are not far off from phone companies in the sense that they just carry traffic.
While it's true that there are presently games being played with port blocking, applications blocking and bandwidth limiting, if given the option of becoming a common carrier makes them immune to the pressures of the copyright industry, then that's the way it should be.
They would also likely stop playing games with the port blocking and all that mess as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</id>
	<title>Oh really?</title>
	<author>TheRealMindChild</author>
	<datestamp>1259320560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.'</i> <br> <br>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .
If they do n't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business .
' Next stop , having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.
If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.
'  Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store... you know... for providing a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251068</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1259327940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I hand you a subpoena and tell you it's for John Smith and he's one of your customers so I expect you to serve it but won't pay you to do so, you might toss it in the circular file as well.  If I want it served, I can do it myself or hire someone to do it for me. I don't just get to recruit slave labor to do it, why should the studios be any different?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I hand you a subpoena and tell you it 's for John Smith and he 's one of your customers so I expect you to serve it but wo n't pay you to do so , you might toss it in the circular file as well .
If I want it served , I can do it myself or hire someone to do it for me .
I do n't just get to recruit slave labor to do it , why should the studios be any different ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I hand you a subpoena and tell you it's for John Smith and he's one of your customers so I expect you to serve it but won't pay you to do so, you might toss it in the circular file as well.
If I want it served, I can do it myself or hire someone to do it for me.
I don't just get to recruit slave labor to do it, why should the studios be any different?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250182</id>
	<title>Next targets</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1259322900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes"<br><br>So next will come shops that sell computers, and photo/video cameras ? Keep reasoning that way and dont stop till all lives in caves (or worse, after all, human brain can be used for copyright infringement purposes after all).<br><br>Of all disaster movies, alien/monster attacks, still have to see one where the copyright industry attacks and successfully destroy mankind, at least have more chances to happen than the arguments of most blockbuster disaster movies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes " So next will come shops that sell computers , and photo/video cameras ?
Keep reasoning that way and dont stop till all lives in caves ( or worse , after all , human brain can be used for copyright infringement purposes after all ) .Of all disaster movies , alien/monster attacks , still have to see one where the copyright industry attacks and successfully destroy mankind , at least have more chances to happen than the arguments of most blockbuster disaster movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes"So next will come shops that sell computers, and photo/video cameras ?
Keep reasoning that way and dont stop till all lives in caves (or worse, after all, human brain can be used for copyright infringement purposes after all).Of all disaster movies, alien/monster attacks, still have to see one where the copyright industry attacks and successfully destroy mankind, at least have more chances to happen than the arguments of most blockbuster disaster movies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249730</id>
	<title>Follow up pissy letters to DVR dealers, Myth TV...</title>
	<author>Chris Tucker</author>
	<datestamp>1259320560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Etc in 3...2...1...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Etc in 3...2...1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Etc in 3...2...1...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250888</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, so?</title>
	<author>Crypto Gnome</author>
	<datestamp>1259326920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, so? It&rsquo;s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws, but parliaments.</p></div><p>And you think that all those MILLIONS of dollars in campaign contributions and outright lobbying of congress will not get laws passed (ie effectively *buying* laws).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They can huff and puff all they want, but that does not make it force of law in any case.</p></div><p>No it'
s the THROWING MONEY AT THE LAWMAKERS which eventually makes it law.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , so ?
It    s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws , but parliaments.And you think that all those MILLIONS of dollars in campaign contributions and outright lobbying of congress will not get laws passed ( ie effectively * buying * laws ) .They can huff and puff all they want , but that does not make it force of law in any case.No it ' s the THROWING MONEY AT THE LAWMAKERS which eventually makes it law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, so?
It’s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws, but parliaments.And you think that all those MILLIONS of dollars in campaign contributions and outright lobbying of congress will not get laws passed (ie effectively *buying* laws).They can huff and puff all they want, but that does not make it force of law in any case.No it'
s the THROWING MONEY AT THE LAWMAKERS which eventually makes it law.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30254266</id>
	<title>This applies to ALL recordable media</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1259420760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Businesses such as recordable DVD manufacturers / VHS, Betamax, Blu-Ray recorders want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of recordable media and equipment and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer. 'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.'</p><p>Business such as movie studios want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of a rapidly dying horse (I see they've remade Nightmare on Elm Street now, ffs can't these people come up with an original idea anymore), while trying to keep that industry firmly locked in 1970s style price-fixing. If THEY don't like having to deal with offering reasonably priced products based on the distribution method (i.e. higher price for physical media, liver concerts, cinema seats etc, and a lower price for digital distribution), then they should get out of the business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Businesses such as recordable DVD manufacturers / VHS , Betamax , Blu-Ray recorders want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of recordable media and equipment and they enjoy that benefit .
But it carries with it a responsibility, ' said Tony Bannon SC , the film industry 's lawyer .
'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes .
If they do n't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business .
'Business such as movie studios want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of a rapidly dying horse ( I see they 've remade Nightmare on Elm Street now , ffs ca n't these people come up with an original idea anymore ) , while trying to keep that industry firmly locked in 1970s style price-fixing .
If THEY do n't like having to deal with offering reasonably priced products based on the distribution method ( i.e .
higher price for physical media , liver concerts , cinema seats etc , and a lower price for digital distribution ) , then they should get out of the business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Businesses such as recordable DVD manufacturers / VHS, Betamax, Blu-Ray recorders want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of recordable media and equipment and they enjoy that benefit.
But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer.
'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes.
If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.
'Business such as movie studios want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of a rapidly dying horse (I see they've remade Nightmare on Elm Street now, ffs can't these people come up with an original idea anymore), while trying to keep that industry firmly locked in 1970s style price-fixing.
If THEY don't like having to deal with offering reasonably priced products based on the distribution method (i.e.
higher price for physical media, liver concerts, cinema seats etc, and a lower price for digital distribution), then they should get out of the business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253142</id>
	<title>Re:Post Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259441640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You honestly think that if the technology existed to open and inspect every parcel without the recipient being aware of it, and without costing the post office massive amounts of cash (i.e. there was a way of filtering/flagging/logging parcels for later manual inspection rather than it being a case of lets hire a hundred more people per post office to do this task) that these jackasses wouldn't have the post office in their sights?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You honestly think that if the technology existed to open and inspect every parcel without the recipient being aware of it , and without costing the post office massive amounts of cash ( i.e .
there was a way of filtering/flagging/logging parcels for later manual inspection rather than it being a case of lets hire a hundred more people per post office to do this task ) that these jackasses would n't have the post office in their sights ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You honestly think that if the technology existed to open and inspect every parcel without the recipient being aware of it, and without costing the post office massive amounts of cash (i.e.
there was a way of filtering/flagging/logging parcels for later manual inspection rather than it being a case of lets hire a hundred more people per post office to do this task) that these jackasses wouldn't have the post office in their sights?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251058</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1259327880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it</p> </div><p> Whoever sends such report must pay for the investigation. ISPs are business, not charity.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection.</p> </div><p> Yes, yes. I pay for the service. So why entertainment industry should get a free ride?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement , the ISP actually investigates it Whoever sends such report must pay for the investigation .
ISPs are business , not charity .
You pay a company monthly ( in most cases ) for a connection .
Yes , yes .
I pay for the service .
So why entertainment industry should get a free ride ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it  Whoever sends such report must pay for the investigation.
ISPs are business, not charity.
You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection.
Yes, yes.
I pay for the service.
So why entertainment industry should get a free ride?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30264474</id>
	<title>Not about Big Media $$$'s</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259495820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not about protecting Big Media's bottom line.  This is about surreptitiously implementing Senator Conroy's proposed internet filter.  If this becomes law, it will be so much easier to comply if every bit and byte is inspected by the ISP's...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not about protecting Big Media 's bottom line .
This is about surreptitiously implementing Senator Conroy 's proposed internet filter .
If this becomes law , it will be so much easier to comply if every bit and byte is inspected by the ISP 's.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not about protecting Big Media's bottom line.
This is about surreptitiously implementing Senator Conroy's proposed internet filter.
If this becomes law, it will be so much easier to comply if every bit and byte is inspected by the ISP's...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30267822</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259571900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.</p></div><p>Not quite. Macrovision fiddles with the analogue video stream in a way that TVs handle just fine but VCR-type recording systems can't. It's encoded on the video signal on the VHS tape and will affect every VCR except those specifically designed to sidestep the issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that VCR 's ( or the VHS tapes ?
) now come with that built in thing that does n't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.Not quite .
Macrovision fiddles with the analogue video stream in a way that TVs handle just fine but VCR-type recording systems ca n't .
It 's encoded on the video signal on the VHS tape and will affect every VCR except those specifically designed to sidestep the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?
) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.Not quite.
Macrovision fiddles with the analogue video stream in a way that TVs handle just fine but VCR-type recording systems can't.
It's encoded on the video signal on the VHS tape and will affect every VCR except those specifically designed to sidestep the issue.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252724</id>
	<title>Re:Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1259347260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>ps. No, NRLA doesn't exist. I made that up.</p></div></blockquote><p>

I'm fairly certain the <a href="http://www.nrla.org/" title="nrla.org">Northern Lumber Retail Association</a> [nrla.org] exists.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ps .
No , NRLA does n't exist .
I made that up .
I 'm fairly certain the Northern Lumber Retail Association [ nrla.org ] exists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ps.
No, NRLA doesn't exist.
I made that up.
I'm fairly certain the Northern Lumber Retail Association [nrla.org] exists.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251192</id>
	<title>Responsibilities?</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1259328600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer.</p></div><p>It's interesting how the content lobby in any country is very keen to assign responsibilities to others when it comes to milking copyrighted works for all they're worth, but when it comes to fulfilling their own responsibilities under the copyright laws of those very same countries, they invariably come up wanting. Matter of fact, they acknowledge no such responsibilities: to the collective minds of the copyright cartel, copyright is an exclusive right belonging only to themselves, not to artists, and certainly not to society as a whole. Furthermore, that right should never, ever expire because, well, they're <i>entitled.</i> It's sickening: the rank odor of corporate hypocrisy has been filling U.S. courtrooms for a number of years over this very issue, and I'm disappointed to see it elsewhere.
<br> <br>
However, that particular industry drone is correct, ISPs do indeed have a responsibility: to the people who pay them to provide a quality service. I don't see the copyright cartels offering to pony up some cold, hard cash to offset the costs of all this enforcement<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... as usual, they want someone else to prop up their obsolete businesses. Personally, I pay some good money for a decent Internet connection, and I'll be damned if I want a single penny of that to go enforcing <i>other people's copyrights!</i> That's not the job of the Internet Service Provider, it's not the job of government, and it's not my job either. That task belongs to those who hold said rights. If they're incapable of enforcing them, or find themselves unable to stay afloat in a world where artificial restrictions on access to creative works have largely vanished, it's up to them to find a way to stay in business <i>or get out of it.</i> George Gilder called this "Creative destruction": some businesses models must go under as casualties of progress. That's the price we pay, and difficult as it is for those who suddenly find themselves left high and dry, civilization moves forward. These selfish pricks are trying to turn back the clock: they're doomed to failure, but they're causing substantial damage on their way down.
<br> <br>
If these sociopathic assholes had their way, we'd all still be listening to Edison cylinders. They need to be stopped, and their excessive influence on big government needs to be reined in once and for all, before the damage they're doing becomes permanent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit .
But it carries with it a responsibility, ' said Tony Bannon SC , the film industry 's lawyer.It 's interesting how the content lobby in any country is very keen to assign responsibilities to others when it comes to milking copyrighted works for all they 're worth , but when it comes to fulfilling their own responsibilities under the copyright laws of those very same countries , they invariably come up wanting .
Matter of fact , they acknowledge no such responsibilities : to the collective minds of the copyright cartel , copyright is an exclusive right belonging only to themselves , not to artists , and certainly not to society as a whole .
Furthermore , that right should never , ever expire because , well , they 're entitled .
It 's sickening : the rank odor of corporate hypocrisy has been filling U.S. courtrooms for a number of years over this very issue , and I 'm disappointed to see it elsewhere .
However , that particular industry drone is correct , ISPs do indeed have a responsibility : to the people who pay them to provide a quality service .
I do n't see the copyright cartels offering to pony up some cold , hard cash to offset the costs of all this enforcement ... as usual , they want someone else to prop up their obsolete businesses .
Personally , I pay some good money for a decent Internet connection , and I 'll be damned if I want a single penny of that to go enforcing other people 's copyrights !
That 's not the job of the Internet Service Provider , it 's not the job of government , and it 's not my job either .
That task belongs to those who hold said rights .
If they 're incapable of enforcing them , or find themselves unable to stay afloat in a world where artificial restrictions on access to creative works have largely vanished , it 's up to them to find a way to stay in business or get out of it .
George Gilder called this " Creative destruction " : some businesses models must go under as casualties of progress .
That 's the price we pay , and difficult as it is for those who suddenly find themselves left high and dry , civilization moves forward .
These selfish pricks are trying to turn back the clock : they 're doomed to failure , but they 're causing substantial damage on their way down .
If these sociopathic assholes had their way , we 'd all still be listening to Edison cylinders .
They need to be stopped , and their excessive influence on big government needs to be reined in once and for all , before the damage they 're doing becomes permanent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit.
But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer.It's interesting how the content lobby in any country is very keen to assign responsibilities to others when it comes to milking copyrighted works for all they're worth, but when it comes to fulfilling their own responsibilities under the copyright laws of those very same countries, they invariably come up wanting.
Matter of fact, they acknowledge no such responsibilities: to the collective minds of the copyright cartel, copyright is an exclusive right belonging only to themselves, not to artists, and certainly not to society as a whole.
Furthermore, that right should never, ever expire because, well, they're entitled.
It's sickening: the rank odor of corporate hypocrisy has been filling U.S. courtrooms for a number of years over this very issue, and I'm disappointed to see it elsewhere.
However, that particular industry drone is correct, ISPs do indeed have a responsibility: to the people who pay them to provide a quality service.
I don't see the copyright cartels offering to pony up some cold, hard cash to offset the costs of all this enforcement ... as usual, they want someone else to prop up their obsolete businesses.
Personally, I pay some good money for a decent Internet connection, and I'll be damned if I want a single penny of that to go enforcing other people's copyrights!
That's not the job of the Internet Service Provider, it's not the job of government, and it's not my job either.
That task belongs to those who hold said rights.
If they're incapable of enforcing them, or find themselves unable to stay afloat in a world where artificial restrictions on access to creative works have largely vanished, it's up to them to find a way to stay in business or get out of it.
George Gilder called this "Creative destruction": some businesses models must go under as casualties of progress.
That's the price we pay, and difficult as it is for those who suddenly find themselves left high and dry, civilization moves forward.
These selfish pricks are trying to turn back the clock: they're doomed to failure, but they're causing substantial damage on their way down.
If these sociopathic assholes had their way, we'd all still be listening to Edison cylinders.
They need to be stopped, and their excessive influence on big government needs to be reined in once and for all, before the damage they're doing becomes permanent.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252700</id>
	<title>The Internet was here first</title>
	<author>gearloos</author>
	<datestamp>1259347020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand it. The internet was here long before the DVD. Why doesn't someone tell the jerkoffs in the Movie industry simply if they don't like it, go back to selling tickets to theaters. Just because they made something that is compatible, why should the original transport have to change to accommodate them? Typical elitist attitude of Sony and co... Now about the RIAA and the Music bafoons..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand it .
The internet was here long before the DVD .
Why does n't someone tell the jerkoffs in the Movie industry simply if they do n't like it , go back to selling tickets to theaters .
Just because they made something that is compatible , why should the original transport have to change to accommodate them ?
Typical elitist attitude of Sony and co... Now about the RIAA and the Music bafoons.. . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand it.
The internet was here long before the DVD.
Why doesn't someone tell the jerkoffs in the Movie industry simply if they don't like it, go back to selling tickets to theaters.
Just because they made something that is compatible, why should the original transport have to change to accommodate them?
Typical elitist attitude of Sony and co... Now about the RIAA and the Music bafoons.. ..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249996</id>
	<title>The auto industry creates death machines!</title>
	<author>psyque</author>
	<datestamp>1259321820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The auto industry should also immediately take responsibility for all the death and cost due to people running over and robbing people/businesses with cars!  They profit from death and destruction!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The auto industry should also immediately take responsibility for all the death and cost due to people running over and robbing people/businesses with cars !
They profit from death and destruction !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The auto industry should also immediately take responsibility for all the death and cost due to people running over and robbing people/businesses with cars!
They profit from death and destruction!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251928</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259335860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's hypocritical. By all rights they should also go after:</p><p>* Australia Post - for providing an analagous facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes (delivering pirated CDs).<br>* Airlines - for the same.<br>* Credit Card companies - for also facilitating the purchase of infringed material.<br>* etc, etc.</p><p>All of these other services having facilitated copyright infringement for far longer than ISPs have been doing so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's hypocritical .
By all rights they should also go after : * Australia Post - for providing an analagous facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes ( delivering pirated CDs ) .
* Airlines - for the same .
* Credit Card companies - for also facilitating the purchase of infringed material .
* etc , etc.All of these other services having facilitated copyright infringement for far longer than ISPs have been doing so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's hypocritical.
By all rights they should also go after:* Australia Post - for providing an analagous facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes (delivering pirated CDs).
* Airlines - for the same.
* Credit Card companies - for also facilitating the purchase of infringed material.
* etc, etc.All of these other services having facilitated copyright infringement for far longer than ISPs have been doing so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252714</id>
	<title>in other news...</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1259347080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>hard drive manufacturers have been asked to ensure that their goods are not used for copyright infringement, or exit the industry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>hard drive manufacturers have been asked to ensure that their goods are not used for copyright infringement , or exit the industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hard drive manufacturers have been asked to ensure that their goods are not used for copyright infringement, or exit the industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252326</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259341140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While it is easy to go along that line of thinking and consider the film studio's claim as completely idiotic, it would be perhaps wise not to.</p><p>Most lay people (including my mother), when confronted with the issue of piracy seem to think that they are not doing anything wrong as they are already paying for the internet access. To them the internet is basically a place from which you can download/stream stuff on demand, and they're paying for that. So in that case, it does make sense for the ISP to pay up the content owner. Ofcourse, it is not that simple technologically to quantify the amount and identify the content owner and probably that is why we (the tech crowd) do not think that this argument holds water.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While it is easy to go along that line of thinking and consider the film studio 's claim as completely idiotic , it would be perhaps wise not to.Most lay people ( including my mother ) , when confronted with the issue of piracy seem to think that they are not doing anything wrong as they are already paying for the internet access .
To them the internet is basically a place from which you can download/stream stuff on demand , and they 're paying for that .
So in that case , it does make sense for the ISP to pay up the content owner .
Ofcourse , it is not that simple technologically to quantify the amount and identify the content owner and probably that is why we ( the tech crowd ) do not think that this argument holds water .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While it is easy to go along that line of thinking and consider the film studio's claim as completely idiotic, it would be perhaps wise not to.Most lay people (including my mother), when confronted with the issue of piracy seem to think that they are not doing anything wrong as they are already paying for the internet access.
To them the internet is basically a place from which you can download/stream stuff on demand, and they're paying for that.
So in that case, it does make sense for the ISP to pay up the content owner.
Ofcourse, it is not that simple technologically to quantify the amount and identify the content owner and probably that is why we (the tech crowd) do not think that this argument holds water.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253002</id>
	<title>Stop give them money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259439000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Possible action: simply don't go anymore to cinema. Each time you go to see their garbage super production, or blow out your ears with shitty music, you give them *YOUR* money. It is with *YOUR* money that MPAA / RIAA, or other international dogs, pays expensive lawyer and politicians to come back to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Possible action : simply do n't go anymore to cinema .
Each time you go to see their garbage super production , or blow out your ears with shitty music , you give them * YOUR * money .
It is with * YOUR * money that MPAA / RIAA , or other international dogs , pays expensive lawyer and politicians to come back to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Possible action: simply don't go anymore to cinema.
Each time you go to see their garbage super production, or blow out your ears with shitty music, you give them *YOUR* money.
It is with *YOUR* money that MPAA / RIAA, or other international dogs, pays expensive lawyer and politicians to come back to you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250232</id>
	<title>ISP's to FILM INDUSTRY</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259323080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ISP's to FILM INDUSTRY:  FUCK OFF!  We build the cars, we don't drive them.  Its not our job to police the roads.  Go find a cop.  Its not our business model that is failing.  We aren't stealing anything from you, and we are tired of you wasting our time.  If your industry is dying, then go and die already, and be done with it.  If you don't stop bugging us, we will encourage your untimely demise, just to be rid of you quicker!  Once again, and very politely, FUCK OFF!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISP 's to FILM INDUSTRY : FUCK OFF !
We build the cars , we do n't drive them .
Its not our job to police the roads .
Go find a cop .
Its not our business model that is failing .
We are n't stealing anything from you , and we are tired of you wasting our time .
If your industry is dying , then go and die already , and be done with it .
If you do n't stop bugging us , we will encourage your untimely demise , just to be rid of you quicker !
Once again , and very politely , FUCK OFF !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISP's to FILM INDUSTRY:  FUCK OFF!
We build the cars, we don't drive them.
Its not our job to police the roads.
Go find a cop.
Its not our business model that is failing.
We aren't stealing anything from you, and we are tired of you wasting our time.
If your industry is dying, then go and die already, and be done with it.
If you don't stop bugging us, we will encourage your untimely demise, just to be rid of you quicker!
Once again, and very politely, FUCK OFF!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253016</id>
	<title>Re:Post Office</title>
	<author>lamapper</author>
	<datestamp>1259439120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe. They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe, and priced like a dumb pipe. But they are trying so hard to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service "X". Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up, they go back to "You can't sue us, we're a dumb pipe". i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side.</p></div><p>I too would like to see their argument used against them to stop the bandwidth shaping, deep packet inspection, throttling of bandwidth, abusing Quality of Service (QoS) settings, restrictions (any kind) and net neutrality.

</p><p>It should be considered Fraud to advertise 16,000Kbps downstream and 2,000Kbps upstream, yet as soon as the Speed Test completes, your bandwidth is throttled to less than 300Kbps down and less than 100Kbps up.  Feels like Fraud to me.

</p><p>It should be considered a violation of Privacy to do any type of inspection of your packets, especially Deep Packet Inspection (DPI).

</p><p>The ISPs should be required to provide a minimum bandwidth to be considered broadband and the current definition, which they do NOT give us, of 768Kbps is way too low and should have been 100Mbps / 100Mbps in the year 2000.  And by 2006, while that could have still been the "minimum" bandwidth to be considered "Broadband"; we should have had plans offering 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps for around $50 per month, as they have in other parts of the World.

</p><p>They are just a "dumb" pipe and I can not wait for another "not-related-to-any-American-telco" entity to enter the American ISP market, provide fiber to all of our homes and take the "dumb" pipe market away from these providers that keep trying to hurt Americans, rather than helping Americans.

</p><p>To date, the only provider that is offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps (for around $100 per month) is Greenlight in Wilson, North Carolina (NC).  They were able to offer this level of service thanks to local politicians inviting their company to come into their community, actually lay fiber to homes, after the Cable Companies and Telcos REFUSED to offer service.

</p><p>The Cable Co/Telco response, was to go to the North Carolina state legislature and attempt to pass laws preventing Greenlight from expanding, attempting to force them to cease and desist offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps service to customers.  These "legal/lobbyist" attempts at controlling the North Carolina market began during the legislatures last term (2009) and is EXPECTED TO CONTINUE in the North Carolina's next legislature's session (2010).  What the lobbyists get away with in N.C., expect to see rolled out nationally across the U.S.A.  Lets hope North Carolina citizens learn and act before it impacts all Americans!

</p><p>The only other place (location, besides <b>Wilson N.C.</b>) where <b>Fiber</b> is being rolled out "<b>OVER THE LAST MILE</b>" <b>to people's homes</b> in America is in <b>Utah</b> (<i>with the exception of Verizon, which is charging $119 per month for 50Mbps / 5 Mbps...wonder what they throttle it back to bandwidth wise...perhaps 300Kbps down and 100Kbps upstream?</i>) .  Brigham City, Utah to be exact; if you have a home and/or apartment building in Brigham, you are allowed to <b>OWN YOUR OWN FIBER</b> connection to your home.  It will set you back $3,000.00, but you will have Fiber to your home.  I would love that.  If I owned an apartment building I would pay for that single strand of Fiber, than use the right hardware laser firewall/router device to multiply the bandwidth on that single strand of Fiber from 1X to 1024X...I first read about that capability in 2005 or 2006...so not new technology in 2009.

</p><p>Bandwidth in reality SHOULD BE UNLIMITED thanks to FIBER + technology.  Thus Bandwidth Scarcity is a MYTH, designed to force you to pay between $100 - $150 per month for 300Kbps downstream and 100Kbps upstream...even though you have been fraudulently promised higher bandwidths.

</p><p>100\% of American consumer's bandwidth is throttled by Cable / Telco ISPs.  You just can not see how bad you are throttled after your SPEED TEST finishes if you are not running the DD-WRT software on a <a href="http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported\_Devices" title="dd-wrt.com">DD-WRT supported device!</a> [dd-wrt.com]  Do yourself a favor, get a <a href="http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported\_Devices" title="dd-wrt.com">DD-WRT supported firewall/router</a> [dd-wrt.com] tomorrow.  Do not purchase any firewall/router that will NOT let you install and run the open source <a href="http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/" title="dd-wrt.com">DD-WRT software</a> [dd-wrt.com].  You know you want to see your TRUE and HONEST bandwidth 24 X 7 in real time!

</p><p>If you are fortunate enough to live in either Wilson, N.C. and/or <a href="http://blog.telephonyonline.com/unfiltered/2009/11/16/utahs-utopia-moves-forward-with-user-owned-fiber/" title="telephonyonline.com">Bringham City, Utah</a> [telephonyonline.com] or one of the other cities served by <a href="http://www.utopianet.org/" title="utopianet.org">Utopia, Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency</a> [utopianet.org] you are indeed very, very, very fortunate!  It also means you have politicians that care about you, your family and your neighbors!

</p><p>If you have Fiber via Greenlight or <a href="http://www.utopianet.org/" title="utopianet.org">Utopia</a> [utopianet.org], please post so everyone will know how true all this information is!  All Americans need this level of service from their ISPs! It will create jobs!

</p><p>Utopia currently serves the following cities in Utah: <a href="http://www.utopianet.org/service-area" title="utopianet.org">Brigham City, Tremonton, Perry City, Layton, Centerville, Murray, Midvale, West Valley City, Riverton, Cedar Hills, Lindon, Orem, Payson, Cedar City</a> [utopianet.org].  WOW!

</p><p>Currently there are 8 cities in addition to Wilson N.C. that have fiber running to their homes.  Pretty soon, thanks to Utopia, there will be 6 more!  So soon there will be 15 cities in the USA that have Fiber to their homes that are NOT related to Verizon specifically!

</p><p>I wonder what they are paying per month for how much bandwidth upstream / downstream?

</p><p>Also, if anyone in these areas, with Fiber, is using the DD-WRT software, stream some content, open up the bandwidth monitor on the DD-WRT software and let us know what you are being throttled back to/ restricted bandwidth wise.

</p><p>From the Utopia FACT page:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>With UTOPIA, each home and business is connected by fiber-optics directly to the main fiber-optic backbone. That means you don't share a your connection with your neighbors. If you order a 10 Mbps service from your UTOPIA service provider, that's exactly what you get, all the time, download and upload. There's no fine print saying speeds "up to" 10 Mbps are "available."</p></div><p>And via the Business services page:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>10 Mbps to 10 Gbps Symmetrical Data Speeds</p></div><p>How many of you reading this wish you had the ability to pay and get Symmetrical Data Speeds between 10Mbps and 10Gpbs?  I know, 100\%.

</p><p>The Cable Companies and American Telcos are sooo screwed.  Best of all they are doing it to themselves by denying that they are just a "pipe" and not providing their subscriber's decent service.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe .
They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe , and priced like a dumb pipe .
But they are trying so hard to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service " X " .
Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up , they go back to " You ca n't sue us , we 're a dumb pipe " .
i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side.I too would like to see their argument used against them to stop the bandwidth shaping , deep packet inspection , throttling of bandwidth , abusing Quality of Service ( QoS ) settings , restrictions ( any kind ) and net neutrality .
It should be considered Fraud to advertise 16,000Kbps downstream and 2,000Kbps upstream , yet as soon as the Speed Test completes , your bandwidth is throttled to less than 300Kbps down and less than 100Kbps up .
Feels like Fraud to me .
It should be considered a violation of Privacy to do any type of inspection of your packets , especially Deep Packet Inspection ( DPI ) .
The ISPs should be required to provide a minimum bandwidth to be considered broadband and the current definition , which they do NOT give us , of 768Kbps is way too low and should have been 100Mbps / 100Mbps in the year 2000 .
And by 2006 , while that could have still been the " minimum " bandwidth to be considered " Broadband " ; we should have had plans offering 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps for around $ 50 per month , as they have in other parts of the World .
They are just a " dumb " pipe and I can not wait for another " not-related-to-any-American-telco " entity to enter the American ISP market , provide fiber to all of our homes and take the " dumb " pipe market away from these providers that keep trying to hurt Americans , rather than helping Americans .
To date , the only provider that is offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps ( for around $ 100 per month ) is Greenlight in Wilson , North Carolina ( NC ) .
They were able to offer this level of service thanks to local politicians inviting their company to come into their community , actually lay fiber to homes , after the Cable Companies and Telcos REFUSED to offer service .
The Cable Co/Telco response , was to go to the North Carolina state legislature and attempt to pass laws preventing Greenlight from expanding , attempting to force them to cease and desist offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps service to customers .
These " legal/lobbyist " attempts at controlling the North Carolina market began during the legislatures last term ( 2009 ) and is EXPECTED TO CONTINUE in the North Carolina 's next legislature 's session ( 2010 ) .
What the lobbyists get away with in N.C. , expect to see rolled out nationally across the U.S.A. Lets hope North Carolina citizens learn and act before it impacts all Americans !
The only other place ( location , besides Wilson N.C. ) where Fiber is being rolled out " OVER THE LAST MILE " to people 's homes in America is in Utah ( with the exception of Verizon , which is charging $ 119 per month for 50Mbps / 5 Mbps...wonder what they throttle it back to bandwidth wise...perhaps 300Kbps down and 100Kbps upstream ?
) .
Brigham City , Utah to be exact ; if you have a home and/or apartment building in Brigham , you are allowed to OWN YOUR OWN FIBER connection to your home .
It will set you back $ 3,000.00 , but you will have Fiber to your home .
I would love that .
If I owned an apartment building I would pay for that single strand of Fiber , than use the right hardware laser firewall/router device to multiply the bandwidth on that single strand of Fiber from 1X to 1024X...I first read about that capability in 2005 or 2006...so not new technology in 2009 .
Bandwidth in reality SHOULD BE UNLIMITED thanks to FIBER + technology .
Thus Bandwidth Scarcity is a MYTH , designed to force you to pay between $ 100 - $ 150 per month for 300Kbps downstream and 100Kbps upstream...even though you have been fraudulently promised higher bandwidths .
100 \ % of American consumer 's bandwidth is throttled by Cable / Telco ISPs .
You just can not see how bad you are throttled after your SPEED TEST finishes if you are not running the DD-WRT software on a DD-WRT supported device !
[ dd-wrt.com ] Do yourself a favor , get a DD-WRT supported firewall/router [ dd-wrt.com ] tomorrow .
Do not purchase any firewall/router that will NOT let you install and run the open source DD-WRT software [ dd-wrt.com ] .
You know you want to see your TRUE and HONEST bandwidth 24 X 7 in real time !
If you are fortunate enough to live in either Wilson , N.C. and/or Bringham City , Utah [ telephonyonline.com ] or one of the other cities served by Utopia , Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency [ utopianet.org ] you are indeed very , very , very fortunate !
It also means you have politicians that care about you , your family and your neighbors !
If you have Fiber via Greenlight or Utopia [ utopianet.org ] , please post so everyone will know how true all this information is !
All Americans need this level of service from their ISPs !
It will create jobs !
Utopia currently serves the following cities in Utah : Brigham City , Tremonton , Perry City , Layton , Centerville , Murray , Midvale , West Valley City , Riverton , Cedar Hills , Lindon , Orem , Payson , Cedar City [ utopianet.org ] .
WOW ! Currently there are 8 cities in addition to Wilson N.C. that have fiber running to their homes .
Pretty soon , thanks to Utopia , there will be 6 more !
So soon there will be 15 cities in the USA that have Fiber to their homes that are NOT related to Verizon specifically !
I wonder what they are paying per month for how much bandwidth upstream / downstream ?
Also , if anyone in these areas , with Fiber , is using the DD-WRT software , stream some content , open up the bandwidth monitor on the DD-WRT software and let us know what you are being throttled back to/ restricted bandwidth wise .
From the Utopia FACT page : With UTOPIA , each home and business is connected by fiber-optics directly to the main fiber-optic backbone .
That means you do n't share a your connection with your neighbors .
If you order a 10 Mbps service from your UTOPIA service provider , that 's exactly what you get , all the time , download and upload .
There 's no fine print saying speeds " up to " 10 Mbps are " available .
" And via the Business services page : 10 Mbps to 10 Gbps Symmetrical Data SpeedsHow many of you reading this wish you had the ability to pay and get Symmetrical Data Speeds between 10Mbps and 10Gpbs ?
I know , 100 \ % .
The Cable Companies and American Telcos are sooo screwed .
Best of all they are doing it to themselves by denying that they are just a " pipe " and not providing their subscriber 's decent service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing that I find fun about all this is that ISPs are a dumb pipe.
They need to be regulated like a dumb pipe, and priced like a dumb pipe.
But they are trying so hard to not be a dumb pipe and pretend that they are better than everyone else because they have stupid service "X".
Yet as soon as a lawsuit like this comes up, they go back to "You can't sue us, we're a dumb pipe".
i would love it if these kind of lawsuits forced them to pick a side.I too would like to see their argument used against them to stop the bandwidth shaping, deep packet inspection, throttling of bandwidth, abusing Quality of Service (QoS) settings, restrictions (any kind) and net neutrality.
It should be considered Fraud to advertise 16,000Kbps downstream and 2,000Kbps upstream, yet as soon as the Speed Test completes, your bandwidth is throttled to less than 300Kbps down and less than 100Kbps up.
Feels like Fraud to me.
It should be considered a violation of Privacy to do any type of inspection of your packets, especially Deep Packet Inspection (DPI).
The ISPs should be required to provide a minimum bandwidth to be considered broadband and the current definition, which they do NOT give us, of 768Kbps is way too low and should have been 100Mbps / 100Mbps in the year 2000.
And by 2006, while that could have still been the "minimum" bandwidth to be considered "Broadband"; we should have had plans offering 1 Gbps / 1 Gbps for around $50 per month, as they have in other parts of the World.
They are just a "dumb" pipe and I can not wait for another "not-related-to-any-American-telco" entity to enter the American ISP market, provide fiber to all of our homes and take the "dumb" pipe market away from these providers that keep trying to hurt Americans, rather than helping Americans.
To date, the only provider that is offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps (for around $100 per month) is Greenlight in Wilson, North Carolina (NC).
They were able to offer this level of service thanks to local politicians inviting their company to come into their community, actually lay fiber to homes, after the Cable Companies and Telcos REFUSED to offer service.
The Cable Co/Telco response, was to go to the North Carolina state legislature and attempt to pass laws preventing Greenlight from expanding, attempting to force them to cease and desist offering 100Mbps / 100Mbps service to customers.
These "legal/lobbyist" attempts at controlling the North Carolina market began during the legislatures last term (2009) and is EXPECTED TO CONTINUE in the North Carolina's next legislature's session (2010).
What the lobbyists get away with in N.C., expect to see rolled out nationally across the U.S.A.  Lets hope North Carolina citizens learn and act before it impacts all Americans!
The only other place (location, besides Wilson N.C.) where Fiber is being rolled out "OVER THE LAST MILE" to people's homes in America is in Utah (with the exception of Verizon, which is charging $119 per month for 50Mbps / 5 Mbps...wonder what they throttle it back to bandwidth wise...perhaps 300Kbps down and 100Kbps upstream?
) .
Brigham City, Utah to be exact; if you have a home and/or apartment building in Brigham, you are allowed to OWN YOUR OWN FIBER connection to your home.
It will set you back $3,000.00, but you will have Fiber to your home.
I would love that.
If I owned an apartment building I would pay for that single strand of Fiber, than use the right hardware laser firewall/router device to multiply the bandwidth on that single strand of Fiber from 1X to 1024X...I first read about that capability in 2005 or 2006...so not new technology in 2009.
Bandwidth in reality SHOULD BE UNLIMITED thanks to FIBER + technology.
Thus Bandwidth Scarcity is a MYTH, designed to force you to pay between $100 - $150 per month for 300Kbps downstream and 100Kbps upstream...even though you have been fraudulently promised higher bandwidths.
100\% of American consumer's bandwidth is throttled by Cable / Telco ISPs.
You just can not see how bad you are throttled after your SPEED TEST finishes if you are not running the DD-WRT software on a DD-WRT supported device!
[dd-wrt.com]  Do yourself a favor, get a DD-WRT supported firewall/router [dd-wrt.com] tomorrow.
Do not purchase any firewall/router that will NOT let you install and run the open source DD-WRT software [dd-wrt.com].
You know you want to see your TRUE and HONEST bandwidth 24 X 7 in real time!
If you are fortunate enough to live in either Wilson, N.C. and/or Bringham City, Utah [telephonyonline.com] or one of the other cities served by Utopia, Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency [utopianet.org] you are indeed very, very, very fortunate!
It also means you have politicians that care about you, your family and your neighbors!
If you have Fiber via Greenlight or Utopia [utopianet.org], please post so everyone will know how true all this information is!
All Americans need this level of service from their ISPs!
It will create jobs!
Utopia currently serves the following cities in Utah: Brigham City, Tremonton, Perry City, Layton, Centerville, Murray, Midvale, West Valley City, Riverton, Cedar Hills, Lindon, Orem, Payson, Cedar City [utopianet.org].
WOW!

Currently there are 8 cities in addition to Wilson N.C. that have fiber running to their homes.
Pretty soon, thanks to Utopia, there will be 6 more!
So soon there will be 15 cities in the USA that have Fiber to their homes that are NOT related to Verizon specifically!
I wonder what they are paying per month for how much bandwidth upstream / downstream?
Also, if anyone in these areas, with Fiber, is using the DD-WRT software, stream some content, open up the bandwidth monitor on the DD-WRT software and let us know what you are being throttled back to/ restricted bandwidth wise.
From the Utopia FACT page:With UTOPIA, each home and business is connected by fiber-optics directly to the main fiber-optic backbone.
That means you don't share a your connection with your neighbors.
If you order a 10 Mbps service from your UTOPIA service provider, that's exactly what you get, all the time, download and upload.
There's no fine print saying speeds "up to" 10 Mbps are "available.
"And via the Business services page:10 Mbps to 10 Gbps Symmetrical Data SpeedsHow many of you reading this wish you had the ability to pay and get Symmetrical Data Speeds between 10Mbps and 10Gpbs?
I know, 100\%.
The Cable Companies and American Telcos are sooo screwed.
Best of all they are doing it to themselves by denying that they are just a "pipe" and not providing their subscriber's decent service.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250544</id>
	<title>Luddites in Oz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259324880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I thought the rightwingnuts of the GOP were wacked out.</p><p>"The tighter you grasp,the more slips through your fingers."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I thought the rightwingnuts of the GOP were wacked out .
" The tighter you grasp,the more slips through your fingers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I thought the rightwingnuts of the GOP were wacked out.
"The tighter you grasp,the more slips through your fingers.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251126</id>
	<title>Ultimatum to the studios:</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1259328300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Produce a product worthy of paying for, or get out of the business. And no, extortion to force payments do not count.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Produce a product worthy of paying for , or get out of the business .
And no , extortion to force payments do not count .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Produce a product worthy of paying for, or get out of the business.
And no, extortion to force payments do not count.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251094</id>
	<title>Action when it is appropriate</title>
	<author>aaronl</author>
	<datestamp>1259328120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with this is that it really should never be the responsibility of an ISP to conduct an investigation just because some other privacy entity said so.</p><p>I shouldn't be able to get a landlord to provide me with tenant information because I decided one was looking at me out of their window.  I shouldn't be able to get a purchase history from a merchant because I decided a customer was going to build a deck and their condo association forbids it.  I shouldn't be able to get subscriber information from an ISP just because I decided that someone downloaded something that I think they shouldn't have.</p><p>If the movie industry wants this kind of information, then they should have to file suit, and get a court order for that information.  Then they will have to prove that something unlawful actually happened, convince a judge that there was damage, and that an order for discovery needs to be created.</p><p>It is inappropriate to allow some private group to have the power to compel anything from anyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with this is that it really should never be the responsibility of an ISP to conduct an investigation just because some other privacy entity said so.I should n't be able to get a landlord to provide me with tenant information because I decided one was looking at me out of their window .
I should n't be able to get a purchase history from a merchant because I decided a customer was going to build a deck and their condo association forbids it .
I should n't be able to get subscriber information from an ISP just because I decided that someone downloaded something that I think they should n't have.If the movie industry wants this kind of information , then they should have to file suit , and get a court order for that information .
Then they will have to prove that something unlawful actually happened , convince a judge that there was damage , and that an order for discovery needs to be created.It is inappropriate to allow some private group to have the power to compel anything from anyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with this is that it really should never be the responsibility of an ISP to conduct an investigation just because some other privacy entity said so.I shouldn't be able to get a landlord to provide me with tenant information because I decided one was looking at me out of their window.
I shouldn't be able to get a purchase history from a merchant because I decided a customer was going to build a deck and their condo association forbids it.
I shouldn't be able to get subscriber information from an ISP just because I decided that someone downloaded something that I think they shouldn't have.If the movie industry wants this kind of information, then they should have to file suit, and get a court order for that information.
Then they will have to prove that something unlawful actually happened, convince a judge that there was damage, and that an order for discovery needs to be created.It is inappropriate to allow some private group to have the power to compel anything from anyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250090</id>
	<title>Class-Action Lawsuit anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It simply amazes me the arrogance of a company that can sit back and whine about shit like this while posting record numbers (and earnings) at the box office.</p><p>Perhaps a class-action lawsuit is in order the next time I waste $15 and two hours of my life on a really shitty movie.  Sound utterly stupid?  Yeah, so does a lot of shit feeding lawyers these days, like this story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It simply amazes me the arrogance of a company that can sit back and whine about shit like this while posting record numbers ( and earnings ) at the box office.Perhaps a class-action lawsuit is in order the next time I waste $ 15 and two hours of my life on a really shitty movie .
Sound utterly stupid ?
Yeah , so does a lot of shit feeding lawyers these days , like this story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It simply amazes me the arrogance of a company that can sit back and whine about shit like this while posting record numbers (and earnings) at the box office.Perhaps a class-action lawsuit is in order the next time I waste $15 and two hours of my life on a really shitty movie.
Sound utterly stupid?
Yeah, so does a lot of shit feeding lawyers these days, like this story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>matzahboy</author>
	<datestamp>1259323800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they had to get $1000 per request, they would be profiting off of piracy.

Many ISPs already forward the take down requests for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had to get $ 1000 per request , they would be profiting off of piracy .
Many ISPs already forward the take down requests for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they had to get $1000 per request, they would be profiting off of piracy.
Many ISPs already forward the take down requests for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250298</id>
	<title>hopeless</title>
	<author>SeanFlotre</author>
	<datestamp>1259323500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>that's why the industry is being so hardline about this stuff, they know it's hopeless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's why the industry is being so hardline about this stuff , they know it 's hopeless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's why the industry is being so hardline about this stuff, they know it's hopeless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250652</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259325480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still have my lifetime dialup service.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) Payed a cool 500 bucks for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have my lifetime dialup service .
: ) Payed a cool 500 bucks for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have my lifetime dialup service.
:) Payed a cool 500 bucks for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249836</id>
	<title>So... paper mills</title>
	<author>Colin Smith</author>
	<datestamp>1259321040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dangerous thing paper. Can lead to all sorts of problems.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dangerous thing paper .
Can lead to all sorts of problems .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dangerous thing paper.
Can lead to all sorts of problems.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250570</id>
	<title>Easy to Answer this Question</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1259325060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The side that owns the most politicians usually wins, unless public opinion is mobilized.<br>Nobody really gives a damn for people who want to unlawfully copy the work of others, so the outcome looks obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The side that owns the most politicians usually wins , unless public opinion is mobilized.Nobody really gives a damn for people who want to unlawfully copy the work of others , so the outcome looks obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The side that owns the most politicians usually wins, unless public opinion is mobilized.Nobody really gives a damn for people who want to unlawfully copy the work of others, so the outcome looks obvious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250274</id>
	<title>Will someone please call these jackasses' bluff?</title>
	<author>seeker\_1us</author>
	<datestamp>1259323380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Film studios need the internet.  The internet doesn't need film studios.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Film studios need the internet .
The internet does n't need film studios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Film studios need the internet.
The internet doesn't need film studios.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251566</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>the\_bogus\_1</author>
	<datestamp>1259331900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree, were does it all stop.

The likes of Sony produce burners that are used far more to copy copyrighted material than is downloaded.

But those companies that are quick to point the finger also hold a large stake in copyright infringement producing products themselves, but like most try to pass the buck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , were does it all stop .
The likes of Sony produce burners that are used far more to copy copyrighted material than is downloaded .
But those companies that are quick to point the finger also hold a large stake in copyright infringement producing products themselves , but like most try to pass the buck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, were does it all stop.
The likes of Sony produce burners that are used far more to copy copyrighted material than is downloaded.
But those companies that are quick to point the finger also hold a large stake in copyright infringement producing products themselves, but like most try to pass the buck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250080</id>
	<title>Get out of the industry?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps if the entertainment giants can't change their business models to suit the realities of the modern marketplace it is THEY who should get out of the industry!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps if the entertainment giants ca n't change their business models to suit the realities of the modern marketplace it is THEY who should get out of the industry !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps if the entertainment giants can't change their business models to suit the realities of the modern marketplace it is THEY who should get out of the industry!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250688</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>hldn</author>
	<datestamp>1259325660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but...</p><p>You didn't RTFA.</p></div><p>you must be new here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but...You did n't RTFA.you must be new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dislike the ridiculous movie / music industry groups as much as anybody but...You didn't RTFA.you must be new here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251122</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>easyTree</author>
	<datestamp>1259328240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dear Water Company,</p><p>My Child is all wet. My neighbour's child squirted him with water obtained from you. I demand that you cut off my neighbour's water supply.</p><p>Thanks.</p><p>Anthony Hoal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear Water Company,My Child is all wet .
My neighbour 's child squirted him with water obtained from you .
I demand that you cut off my neighbour 's water supply.Thanks.Anthony Hoal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear Water Company,My Child is all wet.
My neighbour's child squirted him with water obtained from you.
I demand that you cut off my neighbour's water supply.Thanks.Anthony Hoal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278</id>
	<title>Post Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259323380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is the post office responsible if I mail a copied DVD to someone?
</p><p>Q.E.D.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the post office responsible if I mail a copied DVD to someone ?
Q.E.D .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the post office responsible if I mail a copied DVD to someone?
Q.E.D.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250192</id>
	<title>Douchebag of a summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So the case closed.  Who won and how?  "Ultimatum"?  What's the "else" part that makes it an ultimatum?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the case closed .
Who won and how ?
" Ultimatum " ? What 's the " else " part that makes it an ultimatum ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the case closed.
Who won and how?
"Ultimatum"?  What's the "else" part that makes it an ultimatum?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250350</id>
	<title>Actually, I think the ISPs should fully agree</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1259323800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've known for quite some time that exposure actually CREATES sales, not reduces it.  As it so happens, I just came back from a party where one discussion was "I got this copy of xyz, and I liked it so much I went and bought the album" - which happened to be an answer to someone who did buy a whole book series of an author after reading a library book.</p><p>If I were leading some kind of ISP club I'd call all of them and ensure that indeed NOBODY carries that traffic anymore - absolutely nobody.  I'd give it 2 months before the media industry realises just how deep they've cut their own flesh.  At that point discussions will become a lot more sensible.  There is really no better way to nuke their business that indeed following what they want to do and let them feel the resulting pain.  Because it will prove just how Pyrrhic that victory is.</p><p>So, if you hang together you will either end up with a more reasonable discussion, or they'll go bankrupt - which also not a bad thing IMHO, that's merely another bubble where bursting was long overdue.</p><p>I don't think piracy is good, but there are pirates and home users - the two are different.  One type will become your client if you treat them well, the other type does things in volume and belongs in jail (and has been proven to go out of business if you lower margins).</p><p>If you stick your *customers* in jail for being interested in your product the results will be pretty obvious.  In the US there already a whole generation growing up knowing people of their own age whose life has been destroyed by the RIAA.  Do you really think they will EVER buy another record in their life?</p><p>I give it two months, maybe three.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've known for quite some time that exposure actually CREATES sales , not reduces it .
As it so happens , I just came back from a party where one discussion was " I got this copy of xyz , and I liked it so much I went and bought the album " - which happened to be an answer to someone who did buy a whole book series of an author after reading a library book.If I were leading some kind of ISP club I 'd call all of them and ensure that indeed NOBODY carries that traffic anymore - absolutely nobody .
I 'd give it 2 months before the media industry realises just how deep they 've cut their own flesh .
At that point discussions will become a lot more sensible .
There is really no better way to nuke their business that indeed following what they want to do and let them feel the resulting pain .
Because it will prove just how Pyrrhic that victory is.So , if you hang together you will either end up with a more reasonable discussion , or they 'll go bankrupt - which also not a bad thing IMHO , that 's merely another bubble where bursting was long overdue.I do n't think piracy is good , but there are pirates and home users - the two are different .
One type will become your client if you treat them well , the other type does things in volume and belongs in jail ( and has been proven to go out of business if you lower margins ) .If you stick your * customers * in jail for being interested in your product the results will be pretty obvious .
In the US there already a whole generation growing up knowing people of their own age whose life has been destroyed by the RIAA .
Do you really think they will EVER buy another record in their life ? I give it two months , maybe three .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've known for quite some time that exposure actually CREATES sales, not reduces it.
As it so happens, I just came back from a party where one discussion was "I got this copy of xyz, and I liked it so much I went and bought the album" - which happened to be an answer to someone who did buy a whole book series of an author after reading a library book.If I were leading some kind of ISP club I'd call all of them and ensure that indeed NOBODY carries that traffic anymore - absolutely nobody.
I'd give it 2 months before the media industry realises just how deep they've cut their own flesh.
At that point discussions will become a lot more sensible.
There is really no better way to nuke their business that indeed following what they want to do and let them feel the resulting pain.
Because it will prove just how Pyrrhic that victory is.So, if you hang together you will either end up with a more reasonable discussion, or they'll go bankrupt - which also not a bad thing IMHO, that's merely another bubble where bursting was long overdue.I don't think piracy is good, but there are pirates and home users - the two are different.
One type will become your client if you treat them well, the other type does things in volume and belongs in jail (and has been proven to go out of business if you lower margins).If you stick your *customers* in jail for being interested in your product the results will be pretty obvious.
In the US there already a whole generation growing up knowing people of their own age whose life has been destroyed by the RIAA.
Do you really think they will EVER buy another record in their life?I give it two months, maybe three.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251112</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1259328240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or computers, hell, even the car you drive to the store to buy a blank DVDr.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or computers , hell , even the car you drive to the store to buy a blank DVDr .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or computers, hell, even the car you drive to the store to buy a blank DVDr.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966</id>
	<title>Same to you, buddy</title>
	<author>cheebie</author>
	<datestamp>1259321640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about if they start taking their responsibility seriously and let those works pass into the public domain after a reasonable amount of time, AS WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT.  Give us back our culture, damnit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about if they start taking their responsibility seriously and let those works pass into the public domain after a reasonable amount of time , AS WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT .
Give us back our culture , damnit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about if they start taking their responsibility seriously and let those works pass into the public domain after a reasonable amount of time, AS WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT.
Give us back our culture, damnit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250778</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1259326080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean like AV vendors profiting from virus writers and hackers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like AV vendors profiting from virus writers and hackers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like AV vendors profiting from virus writers and hackers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250800</id>
	<title>Re:Post Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259326200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your argument is:</p><p>The internet and the postal system are both data transportation mechanisms, therefore any arguments that apply to the internet ought to apply to the post office. The fact that these arguments aren't applied to the post office is taken as evidence that they ought not be applied to the internet.</p><p>Have I captured the essence of it correctly?</p><p>This argument neglects to consider the possibility that their criticism of the ISPs may hinge on the details in which the post office is not like the internet. If that were the case, your argument would fail to hold.</p><p>So for one thing, I'm not aware of any well known piracy by mail services, but I'm aware of (and use) a number of indexes of torrents for pirated material. This is in fact, a large portion of what I download each month. In fact, if I were prevented from accessing pirated content, I would probably downgrade to a less expensive connection.</p><p>Let's not delude ourselves with intellectually dishonest arguments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your argument is : The internet and the postal system are both data transportation mechanisms , therefore any arguments that apply to the internet ought to apply to the post office .
The fact that these arguments are n't applied to the post office is taken as evidence that they ought not be applied to the internet.Have I captured the essence of it correctly ? This argument neglects to consider the possibility that their criticism of the ISPs may hinge on the details in which the post office is not like the internet .
If that were the case , your argument would fail to hold.So for one thing , I 'm not aware of any well known piracy by mail services , but I 'm aware of ( and use ) a number of indexes of torrents for pirated material .
This is in fact , a large portion of what I download each month .
In fact , if I were prevented from accessing pirated content , I would probably downgrade to a less expensive connection.Let 's not delude ourselves with intellectually dishonest arguments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your argument is:The internet and the postal system are both data transportation mechanisms, therefore any arguments that apply to the internet ought to apply to the post office.
The fact that these arguments aren't applied to the post office is taken as evidence that they ought not be applied to the internet.Have I captured the essence of it correctly?This argument neglects to consider the possibility that their criticism of the ISPs may hinge on the details in which the post office is not like the internet.
If that were the case, your argument would fail to hold.So for one thing, I'm not aware of any well known piracy by mail services, but I'm aware of (and use) a number of indexes of torrents for pirated material.
This is in fact, a large portion of what I download each month.
In fact, if I were prevented from accessing pirated content, I would probably downgrade to a less expensive connection.Let's not delude ourselves with intellectually dishonest arguments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250114</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's transfer this to postal service. You know, it's quite possible to send illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail. So if someone is accused to receive illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail, should the postal service stop delivering mail to him?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's transfer this to postal service .
You know , it 's quite possible to send illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail .
So if someone is accused to receive illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail , should the postal service stop delivering mail to him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's transfer this to postal service.
You know, it's quite possible to send illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail.
So if someone is accused to receive illegal copies of copyrighted works by mail, should the postal service stop delivering mail to him?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</id>
	<title>Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>Lead Butthead</author>
	<datestamp>1259320680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The court case between the <b>NRLA (National Right to Life Association)</b> and film industry drew to a close yesterday after the <b>NRLA</b> issued an ultimatum: Take <b>copycat violent crimes</b> responsibilities seriously or leave the industry. 'Businesses such as <b>film industry</b> want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of <b>producing violent films</b> and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said the <b>NRLA</b>'s lawyer. 'They provide a facility that <b>children</b> is able to <b>mimic</b>. If they don't like having to deal with <b>copycat violent crimes</b> then they should get out of the business.'</p><p>ps. No, NRLA doesn't exist. I made that up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The court case between the NRLA ( National Right to Life Association ) and film industry drew to a close yesterday after the NRLA issued an ultimatum : Take copycat violent crimes responsibilities seriously or leave the industry .
'Businesses such as film industry want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of producing violent films and they enjoy that benefit .
But it carries with it a responsibility, ' said the NRLA 's lawyer .
'They provide a facility that children is able to mimic .
If they do n't like having to deal with copycat violent crimes then they should get out of the business.'ps .
No , NRLA does n't exist .
I made that up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The court case between the NRLA (National Right to Life Association) and film industry drew to a close yesterday after the NRLA issued an ultimatum: Take copycat violent crimes responsibilities seriously or leave the industry.
'Businesses such as film industry want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of producing violent films and they enjoy that benefit.
But it carries with it a responsibility,' said the NRLA's lawyer.
'They provide a facility that children is able to mimic.
If they don't like having to deal with copycat violent crimes then they should get out of the business.'ps.
No, NRLA doesn't exist.
I made that up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253082</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259440620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD."</p><p>This would have been a massive pain in the ass to my uncle, started out videotaping sports events as a hobby but ended up making a decent amount of money for a side job by selling copies of his work, if he hadn't already moved on to using DVDs instead. My other uncle (also an amateur videographer, but more of a technophobe) must be dreading the day that any of his VHS machines die and need to be replaced if you truely can't record from the inputs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Except that VCR 's ( or the VHS tapes ?
) now come with that built in thing that does n't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD .
" This would have been a massive pain in the ass to my uncle , started out videotaping sports events as a hobby but ended up making a decent amount of money for a side job by selling copies of his work , if he had n't already moved on to using DVDs instead .
My other uncle ( also an amateur videographer , but more of a technophobe ) must be dreading the day that any of his VHS machines die and need to be replaced if you truely ca n't record from the inputs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?
) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.
"This would have been a massive pain in the ass to my uncle, started out videotaping sports events as a hobby but ended up making a decent amount of money for a side job by selling copies of his work, if he hadn't already moved on to using DVDs instead.
My other uncle (also an amateur videographer, but more of a technophobe) must be dreading the day that any of his VHS machines die and need to be replaced if you truely can't record from the inputs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1259321280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.</p><p>Also, there is nothing stopping the Movie industry from attacking DVD-Recorders and VCR's, they simply haven't. I honestly think if they wanted to go up against DVD-Recorders they would have a good enough case to cause legislation forcing VCR Recorders to lock down the types of recording they can do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that VCR 's ( or the VHS tapes ?
) now come with that built in thing that does n't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.Also , there is nothing stopping the Movie industry from attacking DVD-Recorders and VCR 's , they simply have n't .
I honestly think if they wanted to go up against DVD-Recorders they would have a good enough case to cause legislation forcing VCR Recorders to lock down the types of recording they can do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that VCR's (or the VHS tapes?
) now come with that built in thing that doesn't let you record off of another input from a VCR or DVD.Also, there is nothing stopping the Movie industry from attacking DVD-Recorders and VCR's, they simply haven't.
I honestly think if they wanted to go up against DVD-Recorders they would have a good enough case to cause legislation forcing VCR Recorders to lock down the types of recording they can do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30260916</id>
	<title>Re:Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>Anonymous Hermit</author>
	<datestamp>1259505360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Copying a violent crime portrayed in a movie is clearly an infringement on their copyright. You have to negotiate a license before you are allowed to re-enact scenes from their intellectual property (though some would argue this falls under "fair use"). Content creators has to be protected from the public, because that's what governments are for, to serve the interests of corporations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Copying a violent crime portrayed in a movie is clearly an infringement on their copyright .
You have to negotiate a license before you are allowed to re-enact scenes from their intellectual property ( though some would argue this falls under " fair use " ) .
Content creators has to be protected from the public , because that 's what governments are for , to serve the interests of corporations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Copying a violent crime portrayed in a movie is clearly an infringement on their copyright.
You have to negotiate a license before you are allowed to re-enact scenes from their intellectual property (though some would argue this falls under "fair use").
Content creators has to be protected from the public, because that's what governments are for, to serve the interests of corporations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30256058</id>
	<title>Just Once...</title>
	<author>IonOtter</author>
	<datestamp>1259439480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just once...just...<i>ONCE</i>, I'd like to hear the lawyer for the defense lean into their client, nod their head, then turn to the presiding judge and say, "Your honor, based on current law and pre-existing statutes, my client has authorized me to tell the plaintiff, 'Go fuck yourselves.'"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just once...just...ONCE , I 'd like to hear the lawyer for the defense lean into their client , nod their head , then turn to the presiding judge and say , " Your honor , based on current law and pre-existing statutes , my client has authorized me to tell the plaintiff , 'Go fuck yourselves .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just once...just...ONCE, I'd like to hear the lawyer for the defense lean into their client, nod their head, then turn to the presiding judge and say, "Your honor, based on current law and pre-existing statutes, my client has authorized me to tell the plaintiff, 'Go fuck yourselves.
'"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250614</id>
	<title>Re:Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259325300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ps. No, NRLA doesn't exist. I made that up.</p></div><p>It's actually called the NRLC[ommittee].<br>Some (I don't know how many) of their State affiliates call themselves an Association.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ps .
No , NRLA does n't exist .
I made that up.It 's actually called the NRLC [ ommittee ] .Some ( I do n't know how many ) of their State affiliates call themselves an Association .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ps.
No, NRLA doesn't exist.
I made that up.It's actually called the NRLC[ommittee].Some (I don't know how many) of their State affiliates call themselves an Association.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249862</id>
	<title>In Before Betamax -</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not this shit again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not this shit again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not this shit again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250024</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations love the free market until they actually have to compete with one another, against their consumers, or even against themselves (like SONY, who manufactures both content and devices that can copy/store/play that content). Then the free market becomes the biggest, baddest threat out there.</p><p>Instead of playing by the free market's rules, they sissy up and go running off to the courts and the government to try and eliminate their competition via legislation and lawsuits.</p><p>The only solution is to break these companies up. If they can't compete in the free market, then they need to go away. It's as simple as that, even if it means some jobs are lost in the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations love the free market until they actually have to compete with one another , against their consumers , or even against themselves ( like SONY , who manufactures both content and devices that can copy/store/play that content ) .
Then the free market becomes the biggest , baddest threat out there.Instead of playing by the free market 's rules , they sissy up and go running off to the courts and the government to try and eliminate their competition via legislation and lawsuits.The only solution is to break these companies up .
If they ca n't compete in the free market , then they need to go away .
It 's as simple as that , even if it means some jobs are lost in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations love the free market until they actually have to compete with one another, against their consumers, or even against themselves (like SONY, who manufactures both content and devices that can copy/store/play that content).
Then the free market becomes the biggest, baddest threat out there.Instead of playing by the free market's rules, they sissy up and go running off to the courts and the government to try and eliminate their competition via legislation and lawsuits.The only solution is to break these companies up.
If they can't compete in the free market, then they need to go away.
It's as simple as that, even if it means some jobs are lost in the process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249810</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259320920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot already covered this last week, I think. At least over in America.</p><p>The recording industries want to shut down ports on your televisions if they have the ability to download and stream movies, preventing you from making illegal copies with another input device (like a computer or DVR).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot already covered this last week , I think .
At least over in America.The recording industries want to shut down ports on your televisions if they have the ability to download and stream movies , preventing you from making illegal copies with another input device ( like a computer or DVR ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot already covered this last week, I think.
At least over in America.The recording industries want to shut down ports on your televisions if they have the ability to download and stream movies, preventing you from making illegal copies with another input device (like a computer or DVR).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250336</id>
	<title>Re:Get out of the industry?</title>
	<author>matzahboy</author>
	<datestamp>1259323680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, they need to find a new way to make money in the Internet age. But the question here is NOT whether they should attack piracy. This court case is debating whether ISPs should be responsible for fighting piracy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they need to find a new way to make money in the Internet age .
But the question here is NOT whether they should attack piracy .
This court case is debating whether ISPs should be responsible for fighting piracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they need to find a new way to make money in the Internet age.
But the question here is NOT whether they should attack piracy.
This court case is debating whether ISPs should be responsible for fighting piracy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253742</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1259411820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all.</i> <br> <br>Is the ISP obliged to do anything else? Especially as it appears that they are not following a previously agreed procedure.<br> <br> <i>All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty, this does seem reasonable,</i> <br> <br>The ISP is not an investigative agency (and may simply not have the resources to investigate the complaint), nobody is paying them to do any such thing, it also isn't a good business practice to act against customers.<br> <br> <i>provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports..</i> <br> <br>Without investigating they have no idea how valid (if at all) the complaint is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all .
Is the ISP obliged to do anything else ?
Especially as it appears that they are not following a previously agreed procedure .
All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement , the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty , this does seem reasonable , The ISP is not an investigative agency ( and may simply not have the resources to investigate the complaint ) , nobody is paying them to do any such thing , it also is n't a good business practice to act against customers .
provided they do n't flood their offices with garbage reports.. Without investigating they have no idea how valid ( if at all ) the complaint is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are upset because when notification of infringement is sent they essentially send it to the circular file and do nothing at all.
Is the ISP obliged to do anything else?
Especially as it appears that they are not following a previously agreed procedure.
All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty, this does seem reasonable,  The ISP is not an investigative agency (and may simply not have the resources to investigate the complaint), nobody is paying them to do any such thing, it also isn't a good business practice to act against customers.
provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports..  Without investigating they have no idea how valid (if at all) the complaint is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1259320860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility.</p></div><p>Actually, <i>all</i> business want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money by providing a product or service to customers, including the movie industry.  But since when is it the responsibility of one business to protect the business interests of another business?  Cars can be used to facilitate bank robberies, matches can be used to facilitate arson, photocopiers can be used to facilitate copyright infringement.  Should car manufacturers and match manufacturers get out of their respective businesses if they aren't willing to help?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit .
But it carries with it a responsibility.Actually , all business want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money by providing a product or service to customers , including the movie industry .
But since when is it the responsibility of one business to protect the business interests of another business ?
Cars can be used to facilitate bank robberies , matches can be used to facilitate arson , photocopiers can be used to facilitate copyright infringement .
Should car manufacturers and match manufacturers get out of their respective businesses if they are n't willing to help ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit.
But it carries with it a responsibility.Actually, all business want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money by providing a product or service to customers, including the movie industry.
But since when is it the responsibility of one business to protect the business interests of another business?
Cars can be used to facilitate bank robberies, matches can be used to facilitate arson, photocopiers can be used to facilitate copyright infringement.
Should car manufacturers and match manufacturers get out of their respective businesses if they aren't willing to help?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252332</id>
	<title>Re:Same to you, buddy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259341260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This makes me laugh, what culture? What worthy creation do you think these commercial copyright holders should relinquish into the public domain? Mickey mouse or some shitty fifties science fiction movie?  What you call "our culture" was nothing more than banal mass market dreck, none of it inspired by genuine grassroots cultural movement or for reasons other than money. It's not "our culture" any more than a milking shed is part of a cows culture.</p><p>That American culture is today is largely defined by narcissistic consumption and brand identification shows that you've already got what you want, thanks in no small part to "our culture" of yesteryear.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This makes me laugh , what culture ?
What worthy creation do you think these commercial copyright holders should relinquish into the public domain ?
Mickey mouse or some shitty fifties science fiction movie ?
What you call " our culture " was nothing more than banal mass market dreck , none of it inspired by genuine grassroots cultural movement or for reasons other than money .
It 's not " our culture " any more than a milking shed is part of a cows culture.That American culture is today is largely defined by narcissistic consumption and brand identification shows that you 've already got what you want , thanks in no small part to " our culture " of yesteryear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This makes me laugh, what culture?
What worthy creation do you think these commercial copyright holders should relinquish into the public domain?
Mickey mouse or some shitty fifties science fiction movie?
What you call "our culture" was nothing more than banal mass market dreck, none of it inspired by genuine grassroots cultural movement or for reasons other than money.
It's not "our culture" any more than a milking shed is part of a cows culture.That American culture is today is largely defined by narcissistic consumption and brand identification shows that you've already got what you want, thanks in no small part to "our culture" of yesteryear.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252838</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1259349420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty, this does seem reasonable, provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports..</p></div></blockquote><p>
Why is this any of the ISP's business?  To investigate requires resources.  Resources that are not free.  And given that there is no legal or moral reason for the ISP to be spying on what their customers are doing without a warrant, then the film studios can kindly go and get fucked.  Go get a warrant, and THEN pay the ISP for their time to investigate.
</p><p>
Perhaps if the media companies made better use of their funds to actually put some time and effort into producing content that was worth actually bothering to go to the cinema or pay for high def content and actually watch without feeling ripped off, people would be less inclined to download shitty low-def rips or cinema captures (complete with mr big-head in the front row).
</p><p>
Me?  I'd feel ripped off if I bothered wasting the time and bandwidth to download 90\% of the tripe coming out of hollywood these days - let alone pay for it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement , the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty , this does seem reasonable , provided they do n't flood their offices with garbage reports. . Why is this any of the ISP 's business ?
To investigate requires resources .
Resources that are not free .
And given that there is no legal or moral reason for the ISP to be spying on what their customers are doing without a warrant , then the film studios can kindly go and get fucked .
Go get a warrant , and THEN pay the ISP for their time to investigate .
Perhaps if the media companies made better use of their funds to actually put some time and effort into producing content that was worth actually bothering to go to the cinema or pay for high def content and actually watch without feeling ripped off , people would be less inclined to download shitty low-def rips or cinema captures ( complete with mr big-head in the front row ) .
Me ? I 'd feel ripped off if I bothered wasting the time and bandwidth to download 90 \ % of the tripe coming out of hollywood these days - let alone pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All they are asking for is that when the infringed party reports copyright infringement, the ISP actually investigates it In all honesty, this does seem reasonable, provided they don't flood their offices with garbage reports..
Why is this any of the ISP's business?
To investigate requires resources.
Resources that are not free.
And given that there is no legal or moral reason for the ISP to be spying on what their customers are doing without a warrant, then the film studios can kindly go and get fucked.
Go get a warrant, and THEN pay the ISP for their time to investigate.
Perhaps if the media companies made better use of their funds to actually put some time and effort into producing content that was worth actually bothering to go to the cinema or pay for high def content and actually watch without feeling ripped off, people would be less inclined to download shitty low-def rips or cinema captures (complete with mr big-head in the front row).
Me?  I'd feel ripped off if I bothered wasting the time and bandwidth to download 90\% of the tripe coming out of hollywood these days - let alone pay for it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>jonsmirl</author>
	<datestamp>1259324640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that the ISPs should charge for handling DCMA notices. Is there any rule that says they can't? $1000 is excessive but $100 each is not. The ISP is not the one being charged with infringement. It is clear that the content industry is trying to transfer the burden of policing and negative publicity on to an innocent third party, the ISP. The content industry should not be allowed to shift this burden for free. If they want to pursue insane business strategies they can do it on their own dime.</p><p>The world has changed and big content has to learn to live in the new world. Putting a police officer in every teenager's bedroom has tremendous costs associated with it. If big content wants to take that route they should bear the costs and not try and shift them onto a third party. Might be a whole lot cheaper to just sell the content in a form that people actually want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that the ISPs should charge for handling DCMA notices .
Is there any rule that says they ca n't ?
$ 1000 is excessive but $ 100 each is not .
The ISP is not the one being charged with infringement .
It is clear that the content industry is trying to transfer the burden of policing and negative publicity on to an innocent third party , the ISP .
The content industry should not be allowed to shift this burden for free .
If they want to pursue insane business strategies they can do it on their own dime.The world has changed and big content has to learn to live in the new world .
Putting a police officer in every teenager 's bedroom has tremendous costs associated with it .
If big content wants to take that route they should bear the costs and not try and shift them onto a third party .
Might be a whole lot cheaper to just sell the content in a form that people actually want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that the ISPs should charge for handling DCMA notices.
Is there any rule that says they can't?
$1000 is excessive but $100 each is not.
The ISP is not the one being charged with infringement.
It is clear that the content industry is trying to transfer the burden of policing and negative publicity on to an innocent third party, the ISP.
The content industry should not be allowed to shift this burden for free.
If they want to pursue insane business strategies they can do it on their own dime.The world has changed and big content has to learn to live in the new world.
Putting a police officer in every teenager's bedroom has tremendous costs associated with it.
If big content wants to take that route they should bear the costs and not try and shift them onto a third party.
Might be a whole lot cheaper to just sell the content in a form that people actually want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253068</id>
	<title>Ordinary phones are used to organise crime too</title>
	<author>JohnboyHolmes</author>
	<datestamp>1259440500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't making ISPs responsible for the data they carry the same as making ordinary phone companies responsible for the conversations that they carry?
<br>
<br>
I mean normal phones are used to organise criminal activities every day but I am sure most of us would not be happy to have every conversation we have monitored.  Even if you are doing nothing wrong there is the danger of things being taken out of context and inappropriate privacy exposure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't making ISPs responsible for the data they carry the same as making ordinary phone companies responsible for the conversations that they carry ?
I mean normal phones are used to organise criminal activities every day but I am sure most of us would not be happy to have every conversation we have monitored .
Even if you are doing nothing wrong there is the danger of things being taken out of context and inappropriate privacy exposure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't making ISPs responsible for the data they carry the same as making ordinary phone companies responsible for the conversations that they carry?
I mean normal phones are used to organise criminal activities every day but I am sure most of us would not be happy to have every conversation we have monitored.
Even if you are doing nothing wrong there is the danger of things being taken out of context and inappropriate privacy exposure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052</id>
	<title>Yeah, so?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259322060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, so? It&rsquo;s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws, but parliaments.</p><p>They can huff and puff all they want, but that does not make it force of law in any case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , so ?
It    s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws , but parliaments.They can huff and puff all they want , but that does not make it force of law in any case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, so?
It’s not the military-entertainment-industrial complex that makes the laws, but parliaments.They can huff and puff all they want, but that does not make it force of law in any case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249918</id>
	<title>Same old song.</title>
	<author>Stumbles</author>
	<datestamp>1259321340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The media industry has been whining about this for ages; <b> they want others to do their job. </b></htmltext>
<tokenext>The media industry has been whining about this for ages ; they want others to do their job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The media industry has been whining about this for ages;  they want others to do their job. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255420</id>
	<title>Re:Pot calling the kettle black</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259433300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>ps. No, NRLA doesn't exist. I made that up.</p></div><p>No kidding - everybody knows that "right to life" organizations could give a FUCK once the "life" is actually born.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ps .
No , NRLA does n't exist .
I made that up.No kidding - everybody knows that " right to life " organizations could give a FUCK once the " life " is actually born .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ps.
No, NRLA doesn't exist.
I made that up.No kidding - everybody knows that "right to life" organizations could give a FUCK once the "life" is actually born.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253288</id>
	<title>If I were an ISP...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1259401920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It&rsquo;s really a joke. The teeny tiny industry of films, wants to put an ultimatum on the behavior of the <em>whole</em> ISP economy!<br>Most people do not know how ridiculously small the film and music industry is compared to others. It&rsquo;s not far from the toilet seat and brush industry.</p><p>You know what I&rsquo;d do? I&rsquo;d say they forced me to block everything that could be copyright infringement, and then go to its logical conclusion:<br>Block every single video, image, text and just <em>everything</em> from them. Because as we all know, every time you look at one of those things, you made a copy on your computer. Even multiple ones. In the RAM, in the hard disk and CPU cache, in the VRAM, on the screen, etc.</p><p>I would also tell all my competitors to do it. And the TV and radio stations (as much as possible.)</p><p>The world wouldn&rsquo;t even know they existed at all! Nobody would hear of their movies. And they would go bankrupt.</p><p>Then if someone came to me, telling me that that was anti-competitive / monopolistic behavior, I would take out the aggressively written threat letters from the movie studios, and tell him that they forced me to do it against my will.<br>(If my lawyer team would recommend it, I&rsquo;d provoke the studios to send me a court order.)</p><p>So go on, movie studios. Please do (literally) fuck yourselves. ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It    s really a joke .
The teeny tiny industry of films , wants to put an ultimatum on the behavior of the whole ISP economy ! Most people do not know how ridiculously small the film and music industry is compared to others .
It    s not far from the toilet seat and brush industry.You know what I    d do ?
I    d say they forced me to block everything that could be copyright infringement , and then go to its logical conclusion : Block every single video , image , text and just everything from them .
Because as we all know , every time you look at one of those things , you made a copy on your computer .
Even multiple ones .
In the RAM , in the hard disk and CPU cache , in the VRAM , on the screen , etc.I would also tell all my competitors to do it .
And the TV and radio stations ( as much as possible .
) The world wouldn    t even know they existed at all !
Nobody would hear of their movies .
And they would go bankrupt.Then if someone came to me , telling me that that was anti-competitive / monopolistic behavior , I would take out the aggressively written threat letters from the movie studios , and tell him that they forced me to do it against my will .
( If my lawyer team would recommend it , I    d provoke the studios to send me a court order .
) So go on , movie studios .
Please do ( literally ) fuck yourselves .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It’s really a joke.
The teeny tiny industry of films, wants to put an ultimatum on the behavior of the whole ISP economy!Most people do not know how ridiculously small the film and music industry is compared to others.
It’s not far from the toilet seat and brush industry.You know what I’d do?
I’d say they forced me to block everything that could be copyright infringement, and then go to its logical conclusion:Block every single video, image, text and just everything from them.
Because as we all know, every time you look at one of those things, you made a copy on your computer.
Even multiple ones.
In the RAM, in the hard disk and CPU cache, in the VRAM, on the screen, etc.I would also tell all my competitors to do it.
And the TV and radio stations (as much as possible.
)The world wouldn’t even know they existed at all!
Nobody would hear of their movies.
And they would go bankrupt.Then if someone came to me, telling me that that was anti-competitive / monopolistic behavior, I would take out the aggressively written threat letters from the movie studios, and tell him that they forced me to do it against my will.
(If my lawyer team would recommend it, I’d provoke the studios to send me a court order.
)So go on, movie studios.
Please do (literally) fuck yourselves.
^^</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108</id>
	<title>I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1259322420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think ISP's SHOULD deal with infringement notices, but they should also not have to do it for free. a fair administration charge would be applied to each request, say $1000. after all the isp will effectively loose a customer as well as wear support and legal costs out of it. oh whats that, that lunch wasn't free?!?! boohoo.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think ISP 's SHOULD deal with infringement notices , but they should also not have to do it for free .
a fair administration charge would be applied to each request , say $ 1000 .
after all the isp will effectively loose a customer as well as wear support and legal costs out of it .
oh whats that , that lunch was n't free ? ! ? !
boohoo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think ISP's SHOULD deal with infringement notices, but they should also not have to do it for free.
a fair administration charge would be applied to each request, say $1000.
after all the isp will effectively loose a customer as well as wear support and legal costs out of it.
oh whats that, that lunch wasn't free?!?!
boohoo.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250662</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1259325540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either, in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service.  You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again, including if it needs repairs.  An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship. You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection. When it goes out, you contact your provider, and don't talk to a 3rd party shop, etc.  Apples to oranges.</p></div><p>Ok.  Many (in fact, most) manufacturers of photocopiers sell service contracts with their machines and therefore have an ongoing relationship with their customers.  Should Xerox have to deal with a flood of infringement notices when their machines are used to copy sheet music?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either , in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service .
You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again , including if it needs repairs .
An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship .
You pay a company monthly ( in most cases ) for a connection .
When it goes out , you contact your provider , and do n't talk to a 3rd party shop , etc .
Apples to oranges.Ok .
Many ( in fact , most ) manufacturers of photocopiers sell service contracts with their machines and therefore have an ongoing relationship with their customers .
Should Xerox have to deal with a flood of infringement notices when their machines are used to copy sheet music ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The comparisons you are making have nothing to do with the above either, in all of those cases the individual/company has purchased a product and is not providing a continuing service.
You can buy a car and then never talk to the manufacturer/dealer of the car again, including if it needs repairs.
An Internet connection is a continuing service relationship.
You pay a company monthly (in most cases) for a connection.
When it goes out, you contact your provider, and don't talk to a 3rd party shop, etc.
Apples to oranges.Ok.
Many (in fact, most) manufacturers of photocopiers sell service contracts with their machines and therefore have an ongoing relationship with their customers.
Should Xerox have to deal with a flood of infringement notices when their machines are used to copy sheet music?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250994</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>goonerw</author>
	<datestamp>1259327520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store.</i>
<br>
The funnier next step would be.  Sony Vs. Sony.  i.e.  Sony (The Movie arm) Vs Sony (the tech arm that makes DVD recorders and provides the software to copy DVDs).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Next stop , having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store .
The funnier next step would be .
Sony Vs. Sony. i.e .
Sony ( The Movie arm ) Vs Sony ( the tech arm that makes DVD recorders and provides the software to copy DVDs ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store.
The funnier next step would be.
Sony Vs. Sony.  i.e.
Sony (The Movie arm) Vs Sony (the tech arm that makes DVD recorders and provides the software to copy DVDs).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255708</id>
	<title>Re:Original Intent, Time for OSG :D</title>
	<author>freescv</author>
	<datestamp>1259436060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...got 1/2 way down the page before someone said something worth logging in to talk about. Like I agree with people who got there first but this one was worth the login time. reddit and digg.com are the same. Don't always log in and often just read stuff.<br>

This copywrong industry sure needs it's head smashed in though. The best idea I could come up with is that our government, bought and paid for by lobbyists, needs a MAJOR reform (non violent, just better political parties).<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...so I went out and bought <a href="http://www.opensourceg.com/" title="opensourceg.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.opensourceg.com/</a> [opensourceg.com] in hopes that the ideal of Open Source Government takes hold and becomes the majority party, worldwide, in every free nation.<br>

The site sucks atm but I work on it each day in hopes it'll get a bit better and of course just to park the idea that since it worked so well for Linux vs Microsoft in computer land, FILLED with corruption and "need to know security" instead of "lets share this code<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/w everyone to hunt out flaws in it to REALLY be secure.<br>

Well I can't think of a better thing to secure then the hard working people of North America's vote. Every 5 years is good, open source voting machines are a great step forward so the 2 past stolen terms are not repeated (like a Bush inoculation to prevent even worst presidents from stealing their way into office).<br>

I'd rather see a Slashdot for politics, anyone who can reply and leave some links I can add to my pathetic website is appreciated. I'd love to see DAILY VOTES instead of every 5 years &amp; 3 days after elections the lobbyists buy their new "leader's" opinions, stealing the vote from the 360,000,000 people in North America from, maaaaaaybe 500 people that have an interest depriving others instead of trying to cater to the populace.<br>

So we'll take BACK our culture, it's a political thing in my eyes. ISP's can't do much, the power that has been given to the government is being abused and needs reform.<br>

Love to see Open Source parties instead of Pirate Parties (but still support them, just crappy name, liking themselves to people who urder, rape and steal from the populace, nothing like the general population who just wants their tv shows online, in downloadable non drm formats.<br>

So if any of you got an axe, bow or sword and want to waste some time I believe the battle for middle earth will be 2010 when they force countries into submission by FORCING ISP's to cancel your internet after 3 songs are downloaded (even though you pay 100 bucks.month for service and just want your shows in avi instead of on cable tv, f*ckers)<br>

<a href="http://torrentfreak.com/30000-internet-users-to-receive-file-sharing-cash-demands-091125/#comment-619278" title="torrentfreak.com" rel="nofollow">http://torrentfreak.com/30000-internet-users-to-receive-file-sharing-cash-demands-091125/#comment-619278</a> [torrentfreak.com] <br>

30,000 UK residents are already getting the first wave. I send my support their way for unjust, non elected laws being forced upon them by unelected officials. These front line men and women will be so pissed I hope they join the "enemy" camp of freedom, democracy, and fair use we all enjoy on the Internet.<br>

I'll walk to Mordor, I just don't know the way. (where's a few good men<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/w axes, bows and swords when you NEED them? I need a f*cking bunch of Linux coder guys to admin my website<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/w me and rock some parliament!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D)<br>

Don't just bitch and whine about the problems, TRY and find ways to counter it. Letter to congressmen (men, pfffft!) are pretty much useless when they are mostly bought by media guys. Pirate Bay went for parliament, so proud they were willing to "step up".<br>

Just SICK of the abuses in govt w/o accountability nor transparency.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...got 1/2 way down the page before someone said something worth logging in to talk about .
Like I agree with people who got there first but this one was worth the login time .
reddit and digg.com are the same .
Do n't always log in and often just read stuff .
This copywrong industry sure needs it 's head smashed in though .
The best idea I could come up with is that our government , bought and paid for by lobbyists , needs a MAJOR reform ( non violent , just better political parties ) .
...so I went out and bought http : //www.opensourceg.com/ [ opensourceg.com ] in hopes that the ideal of Open Source Government takes hold and becomes the majority party , worldwide , in every free nation .
The site sucks atm but I work on it each day in hopes it 'll get a bit better and of course just to park the idea that since it worked so well for Linux vs Microsoft in computer land , FILLED with corruption and " need to know security " instead of " lets share this code /w everyone to hunt out flaws in it to REALLY be secure .
Well I ca n't think of a better thing to secure then the hard working people of North America 's vote .
Every 5 years is good , open source voting machines are a great step forward so the 2 past stolen terms are not repeated ( like a Bush inoculation to prevent even worst presidents from stealing their way into office ) .
I 'd rather see a Slashdot for politics , anyone who can reply and leave some links I can add to my pathetic website is appreciated .
I 'd love to see DAILY VOTES instead of every 5 years &amp; 3 days after elections the lobbyists buy their new " leader 's " opinions , stealing the vote from the 360,000,000 people in North America from , maaaaaaybe 500 people that have an interest depriving others instead of trying to cater to the populace .
So we 'll take BACK our culture , it 's a political thing in my eyes .
ISP 's ca n't do much , the power that has been given to the government is being abused and needs reform .
Love to see Open Source parties instead of Pirate Parties ( but still support them , just crappy name , liking themselves to people who urder , rape and steal from the populace , nothing like the general population who just wants their tv shows online , in downloadable non drm formats .
So if any of you got an axe , bow or sword and want to waste some time I believe the battle for middle earth will be 2010 when they force countries into submission by FORCING ISP 's to cancel your internet after 3 songs are downloaded ( even though you pay 100 bucks.month for service and just want your shows in avi instead of on cable tv , f * ckers ) http : //torrentfreak.com/30000-internet-users-to-receive-file-sharing-cash-demands-091125/ # comment-619278 [ torrentfreak.com ] 30,000 UK residents are already getting the first wave .
I send my support their way for unjust , non elected laws being forced upon them by unelected officials .
These front line men and women will be so pissed I hope they join the " enemy " camp of freedom , democracy , and fair use we all enjoy on the Internet .
I 'll walk to Mordor , I just do n't know the way .
( where 's a few good men /w axes , bows and swords when you NEED them ?
I need a f * cking bunch of Linux coder guys to admin my website /w me and rock some parliament !
: D ) Do n't just bitch and whine about the problems , TRY and find ways to counter it .
Letter to congressmen ( men , pfffft !
) are pretty much useless when they are mostly bought by media guys .
Pirate Bay went for parliament , so proud they were willing to " step up " .
Just SICK of the abuses in govt w/o accountability nor transparency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...got 1/2 way down the page before someone said something worth logging in to talk about.
Like I agree with people who got there first but this one was worth the login time.
reddit and digg.com are the same.
Don't always log in and often just read stuff.
This copywrong industry sure needs it's head smashed in though.
The best idea I could come up with is that our government, bought and paid for by lobbyists, needs a MAJOR reform (non violent, just better political parties).
...so I went out and bought http://www.opensourceg.com/ [opensourceg.com] in hopes that the ideal of Open Source Government takes hold and becomes the majority party, worldwide, in every free nation.
The site sucks atm but I work on it each day in hopes it'll get a bit better and of course just to park the idea that since it worked so well for Linux vs Microsoft in computer land, FILLED with corruption and "need to know security" instead of "lets share this code /w everyone to hunt out flaws in it to REALLY be secure.
Well I can't think of a better thing to secure then the hard working people of North America's vote.
Every 5 years is good, open source voting machines are a great step forward so the 2 past stolen terms are not repeated (like a Bush inoculation to prevent even worst presidents from stealing their way into office).
I'd rather see a Slashdot for politics, anyone who can reply and leave some links I can add to my pathetic website is appreciated.
I'd love to see DAILY VOTES instead of every 5 years &amp; 3 days after elections the lobbyists buy their new "leader's" opinions, stealing the vote from the 360,000,000 people in North America from, maaaaaaybe 500 people that have an interest depriving others instead of trying to cater to the populace.
So we'll take BACK our culture, it's a political thing in my eyes.
ISP's can't do much, the power that has been given to the government is being abused and needs reform.
Love to see Open Source parties instead of Pirate Parties (but still support them, just crappy name, liking themselves to people who urder, rape and steal from the populace, nothing like the general population who just wants their tv shows online, in downloadable non drm formats.
So if any of you got an axe, bow or sword and want to waste some time I believe the battle for middle earth will be 2010 when they force countries into submission by FORCING ISP's to cancel your internet after 3 songs are downloaded (even though you pay 100 bucks.month for service and just want your shows in avi instead of on cable tv, f*ckers)

http://torrentfreak.com/30000-internet-users-to-receive-file-sharing-cash-demands-091125/#comment-619278 [torrentfreak.com] 

30,000 UK residents are already getting the first wave.
I send my support their way for unjust, non elected laws being forced upon them by unelected officials.
These front line men and women will be so pissed I hope they join the "enemy" camp of freedom, democracy, and fair use we all enjoy on the Internet.
I'll walk to Mordor, I just don't know the way.
(where's a few good men /w axes, bows and swords when you NEED them?
I need a f*cking bunch of Linux coder guys to admin my website /w me and rock some parliament!
:D)

Don't just bitch and whine about the problems, TRY and find ways to counter it.
Letter to congressmen (men, pfffft!
) are pretty much useless when they are mostly bought by media guys.
Pirate Bay went for parliament, so proud they were willing to "step up".
Just SICK of the abuses in govt w/o accountability nor transparency.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250942</id>
	<title>Re:I agree with the recording industry</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259327220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You sir are a clueless monkey, and a retard.<br> <br>"Infringement Notices" are just an email, there is LITERALLY ZERO evidence that it is what it claims to be, or that it was sent by the parties it claims to have been sent by.<br> <br>Therefore I could (trivially easily) fake an email to your ISP, claiming hundreds of infringements, and get your intertubes destroyed. EASILY. and EVERY TIME YOU MOVE ISPs, I could rain down upon you a never ending trail of destruction.<br> <br>Wityh "infringement notices" as they stand today there is literally ZERO verification, ZERO evidence. You are expected to take SIGNIFICANT ACTION based on RUMOR AND HERESAY. This Is Effectively PRESUMPTION OF GUILT, WITH NEITHER JUDGE NOR JURY NOR RECORSE TO A COURT OF LAW.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You sir are a clueless monkey , and a retard .
" Infringement Notices " are just an email , there is LITERALLY ZERO evidence that it is what it claims to be , or that it was sent by the parties it claims to have been sent by .
Therefore I could ( trivially easily ) fake an email to your ISP , claiming hundreds of infringements , and get your intertubes destroyed .
EASILY. and EVERY TIME YOU MOVE ISPs , I could rain down upon you a never ending trail of destruction .
Wityh " infringement notices " as they stand today there is literally ZERO verification , ZERO evidence .
You are expected to take SIGNIFICANT ACTION based on RUMOR AND HERESAY .
This Is Effectively PRESUMPTION OF GUILT , WITH NEITHER JUDGE NOR JURY NOR RECORSE TO A COURT OF LAW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sir are a clueless monkey, and a retard.
"Infringement Notices" are just an email, there is LITERALLY ZERO evidence that it is what it claims to be, or that it was sent by the parties it claims to have been sent by.
Therefore I could (trivially easily) fake an email to your ISP, claiming hundreds of infringements, and get your intertubes destroyed.
EASILY. and EVERY TIME YOU MOVE ISPs, I could rain down upon you a never ending trail of destruction.
Wityh "infringement notices" as they stand today there is literally ZERO verification, ZERO evidence.
You are expected to take SIGNIFICANT ACTION based on RUMOR AND HERESAY.
This Is Effectively PRESUMPTION OF GUILT, WITH NEITHER JUDGE NOR JURY NOR RECORSE TO A COURT OF LAW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251164</id>
	<title>Ultimatum?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259328480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's like suing the transportation infrastructure for enabling drunk driving. Seriously, folks, this is STUPID.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's like suing the transportation infrastructure for enabling drunk driving .
Seriously , folks , this is STUPID .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's like suing the transportation infrastructure for enabling drunk driving.
Seriously, folks, this is STUPID.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30254186</id>
	<title>Re:Post Office</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259419740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny. The ISPs aren't to blame, they're just providing a service. It's not their fault people are using it to break the law.<br>The torrent/P2P/FTP/etc sites aren't to blame, they just provide links to other content. It's not their fault people are uploading illegal content.<br>The uploaders aren't to blame. They just installed a P2P program, and unbeknownst to them the program started sharing their private files. And besides, people aren't downloading whole works off them, just a tiny portion of it, which would surely be considered fair use. It's not their fault the downloaders are downloading many tiny portions, and/or other portions of the work from other innocent P2P users.<br>The downloaders aren't to blame either. Why, they're just sampling the content. You know, so they can not buy it later. Or give free advertising by telling their friends, so they too can download it. Or they don't like the price. Or the content. Or the format, the quality, the producer, the publisher, the retailer, or the payment method (ones that decrease money in the buyer's account are particularly disliked).<br>Well looky here, the only party left is the content industry. Ah-ha! THEY must be to blame! After all, we have to blame SOMEONE for society's ills, clearly it must be the evil corporation, since everybody else is just an innocent bystander.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny .
The ISPs are n't to blame , they 're just providing a service .
It 's not their fault people are using it to break the law.The torrent/P2P/FTP/etc sites are n't to blame , they just provide links to other content .
It 's not their fault people are uploading illegal content.The uploaders are n't to blame .
They just installed a P2P program , and unbeknownst to them the program started sharing their private files .
And besides , people are n't downloading whole works off them , just a tiny portion of it , which would surely be considered fair use .
It 's not their fault the downloaders are downloading many tiny portions , and/or other portions of the work from other innocent P2P users.The downloaders are n't to blame either .
Why , they 're just sampling the content .
You know , so they can not buy it later .
Or give free advertising by telling their friends , so they too can download it .
Or they do n't like the price .
Or the content .
Or the format , the quality , the producer , the publisher , the retailer , or the payment method ( ones that decrease money in the buyer 's account are particularly disliked ) .Well looky here , the only party left is the content industry .
Ah-ha ! THEY must be to blame !
After all , we have to blame SOMEONE for society 's ills , clearly it must be the evil corporation , since everybody else is just an innocent bystander .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny.
The ISPs aren't to blame, they're just providing a service.
It's not their fault people are using it to break the law.The torrent/P2P/FTP/etc sites aren't to blame, they just provide links to other content.
It's not their fault people are uploading illegal content.The uploaders aren't to blame.
They just installed a P2P program, and unbeknownst to them the program started sharing their private files.
And besides, people aren't downloading whole works off them, just a tiny portion of it, which would surely be considered fair use.
It's not their fault the downloaders are downloading many tiny portions, and/or other portions of the work from other innocent P2P users.The downloaders aren't to blame either.
Why, they're just sampling the content.
You know, so they can not buy it later.
Or give free advertising by telling their friends, so they too can download it.
Or they don't like the price.
Or the content.
Or the format, the quality, the producer, the publisher, the retailer, or the payment method (ones that decrease money in the buyer's account are particularly disliked).Well looky here, the only party left is the content industry.
Ah-ha! THEY must be to blame!
After all, we have to blame SOMEONE for society's ills, clearly it must be the evil corporation, since everybody else is just an innocent bystander.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249926</id>
	<title>Oh look!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259321400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>kdawson has posted an Australian story. Fancy that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>kdawson has posted an Australian story .
Fancy that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kdawson has posted an Australian story.
Fancy that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250134</id>
	<title>Postal service</title>
	<author>xiando</author>
	<datestamp>1259322600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Letters and packages can contain all sorts of illicit material, I hope the movie industry doesn't manage to sue and buy judges into making them have to open every letter and every package just to make sure that there is no sign of "pirated" material inside. I never bought a single DVD, but I probably would have if the movie industry had not declared that it is somehow criminal to play legally bought DVDs on my GNU/Linux entertainment system back in the day. This joke of a trial has obviously not changed my opinion regarding buying DVDs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Letters and packages can contain all sorts of illicit material , I hope the movie industry does n't manage to sue and buy judges into making them have to open every letter and every package just to make sure that there is no sign of " pirated " material inside .
I never bought a single DVD , but I probably would have if the movie industry had not declared that it is somehow criminal to play legally bought DVDs on my GNU/Linux entertainment system back in the day .
This joke of a trial has obviously not changed my opinion regarding buying DVDs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Letters and packages can contain all sorts of illicit material, I hope the movie industry doesn't manage to sue and buy judges into making them have to open every letter and every package just to make sure that there is no sign of "pirated" material inside.
I never bought a single DVD, but I probably would have if the movie industry had not declared that it is somehow criminal to play legally bought DVDs on my GNU/Linux entertainment system back in the day.
This joke of a trial has obviously not changed my opinion regarding buying DVDs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252780</id>
	<title>Re:Those brave souls protecting film copyright....</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1259348280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I hope that somehow iinet wins this case, but even if they do</p></div></blockquote><p>

I don't think the movie studio's have much of a chance. Justice Cowdroy is not stupid or a luddite. AFACT had three complaints against iinet which were:<br>
1. iinet hosted copyrighted material on its servers (complaint withdrawn by AFACT).<br>
2. iinet knowingly facilitated copyright infringement and directed customers to infringing web sites (complaint withdrawn by AFACT).<br>
3. iinet failed to pass on infringement notices to customers.<br> <br>

So AFACT only has its most minor and weakest complaint left against iinet and iinet have a solid defence. I'd be quite surprised if this case ends in the favour of AFACT given the way they've conducted their investigations, the dubiousness of their evidence and the fact that most of their complaints were withdrawn after the case began. iinet has taken the line that they do not monitor their customers in accordance with Australian privacy laws nor do they disconnect their customers based on an allegation and the studio's needed to present solid evidence that infringement had occurred before iinet could action on it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope that somehow iinet wins this case , but even if they do I do n't think the movie studio 's have much of a chance .
Justice Cowdroy is not stupid or a luddite .
AFACT had three complaints against iinet which were : 1. iinet hosted copyrighted material on its servers ( complaint withdrawn by AFACT ) .
2. iinet knowingly facilitated copyright infringement and directed customers to infringing web sites ( complaint withdrawn by AFACT ) .
3. iinet failed to pass on infringement notices to customers .
So AFACT only has its most minor and weakest complaint left against iinet and iinet have a solid defence .
I 'd be quite surprised if this case ends in the favour of AFACT given the way they 've conducted their investigations , the dubiousness of their evidence and the fact that most of their complaints were withdrawn after the case began .
iinet has taken the line that they do not monitor their customers in accordance with Australian privacy laws nor do they disconnect their customers based on an allegation and the studio 's needed to present solid evidence that infringement had occurred before iinet could action on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope that somehow iinet wins this case, but even if they do

I don't think the movie studio's have much of a chance.
Justice Cowdroy is not stupid or a luddite.
AFACT had three complaints against iinet which were:
1. iinet hosted copyrighted material on its servers (complaint withdrawn by AFACT).
2. iinet knowingly facilitated copyright infringement and directed customers to infringing web sites (complaint withdrawn by AFACT).
3. iinet failed to pass on infringement notices to customers.
So AFACT only has its most minor and weakest complaint left against iinet and iinet have a solid defence.
I'd be quite surprised if this case ends in the favour of AFACT given the way they've conducted their investigations, the dubiousness of their evidence and the fact that most of their complaints were withdrawn after the case began.
iinet has taken the line that they do not monitor their customers in accordance with Australian privacy laws nor do they disconnect their customers based on an allegation and the studio's needed to present solid evidence that infringement had occurred before iinet could action on it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252180</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>multisync</author>
	<datestamp>1259339220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super store</p></div></blockquote><p>Yeah, it's scary to think about what would happen if the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony\_Corp.\_of\_America\_v.\_Universal\_City\_Studios,\_Inc." title="wikipedia.org">Betamax case</a> [wikipedia.org]<br>were being tried today. The geniuses in the movie industry did their best to kill VCRs for the home market on the basis that they "could be used for copyright infringement." Ruling that recording for the purpose of time shifting was fair use was pretty radical, as was finding that the manufacturers were not responsible for any infringement that does take place.</p><p>It seems a lot of countries have developed some pretty radical ideas about copyright law.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Next stop , having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super storeYeah , it 's scary to think about what would happen if the Betamax case [ wikipedia.org ] were being tried today .
The geniuses in the movie industry did their best to kill VCRs for the home market on the basis that they " could be used for copyright infringement .
" Ruling that recording for the purpose of time shifting was fair use was pretty radical , as was finding that the manufacturers were not responsible for any infringement that does take place.It seems a lot of countries have developed some pretty radical ideas about copyright law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next stop, having DVD-Recorders and VCRs removed from the shelves of your local super storeYeah, it's scary to think about what would happen if the Betamax case [wikipedia.org]were being tried today.
The geniuses in the movie industry did their best to kill VCRs for the home market on the basis that they "could be used for copyright infringement.
" Ruling that recording for the purpose of time shifting was fair use was pretty radical, as was finding that the manufacturers were not responsible for any infringement that does take place.It seems a lot of countries have developed some pretty radical ideas about copyright law.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253790</id>
	<title>Re:Oh really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259412900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn it all my EYES and EARS are infringing all the time maybe I should have them removed. Perhaps I should have my brain lobotomized since I can REMEMBER their crap as well</p><p>I'm soooo surprised that no one has gone on a gun nut killing spree at the label law firms yet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn it all my EYES and EARS are infringing all the time maybe I should have them removed .
Perhaps I should have my brain lobotomized since I can REMEMBER their crap as wellI 'm soooo surprised that no one has gone on a gun nut killing spree at the label law firms yet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn it all my EYES and EARS are infringing all the time maybe I should have them removed.
Perhaps I should have my brain lobotomized since I can REMEMBER their crap as wellI'm soooo surprised that no one has gone on a gun nut killing spree at the label law firms yet</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252564</id>
	<title>When is the world going to reform lobbies?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259344920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is Austrialia post doing to curtail the piracy of copyrighted works through the mail?</p><p>What we really need to do is force our politicians to stop accepting contributions from industry to pass insane, unfair, illogical laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is Austrialia post doing to curtail the piracy of copyrighted works through the mail ? What we really need to do is force our politicians to stop accepting contributions from industry to pass insane , unfair , illogical laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is Austrialia post doing to curtail the piracy of copyrighted works through the mail?What we really need to do is force our politicians to stop accepting contributions from industry to pass insane, unfair, illogical laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30256326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30254186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30261712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252326
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30267822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30260916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_27_2035244_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30279016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251058
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250662
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30279016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249896
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30267822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249960
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30256326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250336
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249836
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250274
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251192
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250990
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250800
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251050
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253016
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30254186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30260916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252724
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30249966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30255708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250090
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250942
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30261712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30253438
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30252856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250348
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30254266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_27_2035244.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30250888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_27_2035244.30251512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
