<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_07_1917245</id>
	<title>CRIA Faces $60 Billion Lawsuit</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1260183600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jvillain writes <i>"The Canadian Recording Industry Association faces a <a href="http://www.thestar.com/business/article/735096--geist-record-industry-faces-liability-over-infringement">lawsuit for 60 billion dollars</a> over willful infringement.  These numbers may sound outrageous, yet they are based on the same rules that led the recording industry to claim a single file sharer is liable for millions in damages.  Since these exact same companies are currently in the middle of trying to force the Canadian government to bring in a DMCA for Canada, it will be interesting to see how they try to spin this."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jvillain writes " The Canadian Recording Industry Association faces a lawsuit for 60 billion dollars over willful infringement .
These numbers may sound outrageous , yet they are based on the same rules that led the recording industry to claim a single file sharer is liable for millions in damages .
Since these exact same companies are currently in the middle of trying to force the Canadian government to bring in a DMCA for Canada , it will be interesting to see how they try to spin this .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jvillain writes "The Canadian Recording Industry Association faces a lawsuit for 60 billion dollars over willful infringement.
These numbers may sound outrageous, yet they are based on the same rules that led the recording industry to claim a single file sharer is liable for millions in damages.
Since these exact same companies are currently in the middle of trying to force the Canadian government to bring in a DMCA for Canada, it will be interesting to see how they try to spin this.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359026</id>
	<title>my bet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is they'll never pay a fine. guess how?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is they 'll never pay a fine .
guess how ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is they'll never pay a fine.
guess how?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361060</id>
	<title>Re:One unanswered question?</title>
	<author>realityimpaired</author>
	<datestamp>1260201660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because it's in Canada. Up here, we don't file a lawsuit at the drop of a hat. We make a phone call. We write a letter. We make a second phone call. We send a fax. We ask to speak to the supervisor. We remain polite the whole time, and try to make the other party understand our point of view so that the dispute can be solved amicably.</p><p>Most of us *never* file a lawsuit, and those of us who do only do it because the other party stops returning our phone calls.</p><p>In seriousness, they were probably holding out hope (albeit in vain) that the recording industry would see their way to doing the right thing, and to paying the artists their due.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because it 's in Canada .
Up here , we do n't file a lawsuit at the drop of a hat .
We make a phone call .
We write a letter .
We make a second phone call .
We send a fax .
We ask to speak to the supervisor .
We remain polite the whole time , and try to make the other party understand our point of view so that the dispute can be solved amicably.Most of us * never * file a lawsuit , and those of us who do only do it because the other party stops returning our phone calls.In seriousness , they were probably holding out hope ( albeit in vain ) that the recording industry would see their way to doing the right thing , and to paying the artists their due .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because it's in Canada.
Up here, we don't file a lawsuit at the drop of a hat.
We make a phone call.
We write a letter.
We make a second phone call.
We send a fax.
We ask to speak to the supervisor.
We remain polite the whole time, and try to make the other party understand our point of view so that the dispute can be solved amicably.Most of us *never* file a lawsuit, and those of us who do only do it because the other party stops returning our phone calls.In seriousness, they were probably holding out hope (albeit in vain) that the recording industry would see their way to doing the right thing, and to paying the artists their due.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360516</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>jvillain</author>
	<datestamp>1260197520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being entered into evidence no doubt will be transcripts of the RIAA companies swearing before numerous judges in the US that the value of a song is really $40,000 or what ever the number is. That is what makes this sooooo juicy. They are going to have to tell the just that we were full of sh\_t when we said that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being entered into evidence no doubt will be transcripts of the RIAA companies swearing before numerous judges in the US that the value of a song is really $ 40,000 or what ever the number is .
That is what makes this sooooo juicy .
They are going to have to tell the just that we were full of sh \ _t when we said that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being entered into evidence no doubt will be transcripts of the RIAA companies swearing before numerous judges in the US that the value of a song is really $40,000 or what ever the number is.
That is what makes this sooooo juicy.
They are going to have to tell the just that we were full of sh\_t when we said that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</id>
	<title>Irony</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1260187320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Irony, defined: The institution responsible for changing copyright law so individuals face millions in fines and years behind jail now has to argue against it to save its own ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Irony , defined : The institution responsible for changing copyright law so individuals face millions in fines and years behind jail now has to argue against it to save its own ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Irony, defined: The institution responsible for changing copyright law so individuals face millions in fines and years behind jail now has to argue against it to save its own ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359278</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Lonewolf666</author>
	<datestamp>1260188580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A settlement requires both parties to agree.<br>In this case, I don't see how the CRIA can "prove" to be in the right. Unless they offer a really substantial settlement (several hundred million?) plaintiffs might prefer to go ahead with the lawsuit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A settlement requires both parties to agree.In this case , I do n't see how the CRIA can " prove " to be in the right .
Unless they offer a really substantial settlement ( several hundred million ?
) plaintiffs might prefer to go ahead with the lawsuit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A settlement requires both parties to agree.In this case, I don't see how the CRIA can "prove" to be in the right.
Unless they offer a really substantial settlement (several hundred million?
) plaintiffs might prefer to go ahead with the lawsuit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359150</id>
	<title>Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>digitalunity</author>
	<datestamp>1260188040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, they are showing their true colors here. They don't care about the artists income, they care about lining their own pockets. You think when they sue consumers for copyright infringement they divvy up that money among the artists whose copyrights were violated? Nope.</p><p>They want to collect all the money without paying it out to artists. Not to mention a lot of them aren't paying artists at all, or enough for their digital downloads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , they are showing their true colors here .
They do n't care about the artists income , they care about lining their own pockets .
You think when they sue consumers for copyright infringement they divvy up that money among the artists whose copyrights were violated ?
Nope.They want to collect all the money without paying it out to artists .
Not to mention a lot of them are n't paying artists at all , or enough for their digital downloads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, they are showing their true colors here.
They don't care about the artists income, they care about lining their own pockets.
You think when they sue consumers for copyright infringement they divvy up that money among the artists whose copyrights were violated?
Nope.They want to collect all the money without paying it out to artists.
Not to mention a lot of them aren't paying artists at all, or enough for their digital downloads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104</id>
	<title>They deserve what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every penny won by the artists in this lawsuit will be deserved. I hope the CRIA is found liable for every penny of the $60 billion and is put out of business once and for all.</p><p>I also hope similar infringements are found in the United States for both the RIAA and the MPAA. No company that treats their customers as poorly as these companies do deserves to be in business.</p><p>Time to cut out the middle man. The internet has opened huge new avenues for distribution; it's time the industry starts getting on board and the artists and content creators start getting more of what they are due.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every penny won by the artists in this lawsuit will be deserved .
I hope the CRIA is found liable for every penny of the $ 60 billion and is put out of business once and for all.I also hope similar infringements are found in the United States for both the RIAA and the MPAA .
No company that treats their customers as poorly as these companies do deserves to be in business.Time to cut out the middle man .
The internet has opened huge new avenues for distribution ; it 's time the industry starts getting on board and the artists and content creators start getting more of what they are due .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every penny won by the artists in this lawsuit will be deserved.
I hope the CRIA is found liable for every penny of the $60 billion and is put out of business once and for all.I also hope similar infringements are found in the United States for both the RIAA and the MPAA.
No company that treats their customers as poorly as these companies do deserves to be in business.Time to cut out the middle man.
The internet has opened huge new avenues for distribution; it's time the industry starts getting on board and the artists and content creators start getting more of what they are due.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30372016</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>easyTree</author>
	<datestamp>1260275400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They admit they knew they didn't have the rights, and that they made $50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm not sure this law thing operates like politics. In politics you can 'hold your hands up' and say 'my bad, I made a mistake - I accept full responsibility' and that's the end of it - you walk away scott free - i.e. the name of the game is getting people (well, politicians<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) to tell the truth (a lofty goal) - not to punish them for their crimes.</p><p>I'm pretty sure in law, there's some element of punishment involved. Clearly IANAL.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They admit they knew they did n't have the rights , and that they made $ 50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to.I 'm not sure this law thing operates like politics .
In politics you can 'hold your hands up ' and say 'my bad , I made a mistake - I accept full responsibility ' and that 's the end of it - you walk away scott free - i.e .
the name of the game is getting people ( well , politicians : ) to tell the truth ( a lofty goal ) - not to punish them for their crimes.I 'm pretty sure in law , there 's some element of punishment involved .
Clearly IANAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They admit they knew they didn't have the rights, and that they made $50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to.I'm not sure this law thing operates like politics.
In politics you can 'hold your hands up' and say 'my bad, I made a mistake - I accept full responsibility' and that's the end of it - you walk away scott free - i.e.
the name of the game is getting people (well, politicians :) to tell the truth (a lofty goal) - not to punish them for their crimes.I'm pretty sure in law, there's some element of punishment involved.
Clearly IANAL.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360320</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260196140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are currently running low on people that know how to weld.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are currently running low on people that know how to weld .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are currently running low on people that know how to weld.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359804</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1260191880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards. When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers, the precedent is already there that each song is only worth, say, $1 per infraction.</p></div></blockquote><p>

That's all assuming the equivalence between CRIA pirating and individuals doing it.  I'm sure CRIA will argue it's not the same; they'll have some legal argument that they are "special" and simply a little slow working through their royalty backlog rather than being pirates, etc etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards .
When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers , the precedent is already there that each song is only worth , say , $ 1 per infraction .
That 's all assuming the equivalence between CRIA pirating and individuals doing it .
I 'm sure CRIA will argue it 's not the same ; they 'll have some legal argument that they are " special " and simply a little slow working through their royalty backlog rather than being pirates , etc etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards.
When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers, the precedent is already there that each song is only worth, say, $1 per infraction.
That's all assuming the equivalence between CRIA pirating and individuals doing it.
I'm sure CRIA will argue it's not the same; they'll have some legal argument that they are "special" and simply a little slow working through their royalty backlog rather than being pirates, etc etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361852</id>
	<title>Re:They deserve what they get</title>
	<author>diginess</author>
	<datestamp>1260209040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, you're completely missing the big picture which everyone else is seeing here.
1.  These companies don't pay their real employees, the artists.
   a.  The only contracts they offer make the artist work for free essentially.  You could make more at a 7/11.  In fact, you'll owe them far more money when you're done working for them.
2.  These companies make a good deal of money suing their fans.
   a.  These companies are lying in that they say they are collecting money for the artists.  In fact, that money does not see its way to the artists.
       i.  Therefore, they are ruining people's lives for no purpose other than to make themselves more money.  They really do not care about their artists.

In conclusion, the world would be a better place if these people were all dead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you 're completely missing the big picture which everyone else is seeing here .
1. These companies do n't pay their real employees , the artists .
a. The only contracts they offer make the artist work for free essentially .
You could make more at a 7/11 .
In fact , you 'll owe them far more money when you 're done working for them .
2. These companies make a good deal of money suing their fans .
a. These companies are lying in that they say they are collecting money for the artists .
In fact , that money does not see its way to the artists .
i. Therefore , they are ruining people 's lives for no purpose other than to make themselves more money .
They really do not care about their artists .
In conclusion , the world would be a better place if these people were all dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you're completely missing the big picture which everyone else is seeing here.
1.  These companies don't pay their real employees, the artists.
a.  The only contracts they offer make the artist work for free essentially.
You could make more at a 7/11.
In fact, you'll owe them far more money when you're done working for them.
2.  These companies make a good deal of money suing their fans.
a.  These companies are lying in that they say they are collecting money for the artists.
In fact, that money does not see its way to the artists.
i.  Therefore, they are ruining people's lives for no purpose other than to make themselves more money.
They really do not care about their artists.
In conclusion, the world would be a better place if these people were all dead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360134</id>
	<title>Perfection</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1260194460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sometimes life just balances out. Should this pan out, it would be a day to celebrate. Karma is a BITCH<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes life just balances out .
Should this pan out , it would be a day to celebrate .
Karma is a BITCH ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes life just balances out.
Should this pan out, it would be a day to celebrate.
Karma is a BITCH ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369432</id>
	<title>Is there any way</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1260305580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that part of the settlement could include a clause that states under no circumstances that another album by Celine Dion or Bryan Adams is EVER released anywhere? Thanks in advance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that part of the settlement could include a clause that states under no circumstances that another album by Celine Dion or Bryan Adams is EVER released anywhere ?
Thanks in advance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that part of the settlement could include a clause that states under no circumstances that another album by Celine Dion or Bryan Adams is EVER released anywhere?
Thanks in advance.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362740</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>mpe</author>
	<datestamp>1260262800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>But I don't have much hope for that. The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians. Why do I feel that they're just gonna get a (hard) slap on the wrist for this?</i> <br> <br>As long as it gets before a judge it's going to hurt. The Canadian Judiciary are no friends of the entertainments industry.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But I do n't have much hope for that .
The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians .
Why do I feel that they 're just gon na get a ( hard ) slap on the wrist for this ?
As long as it gets before a judge it 's going to hurt .
The Canadian Judiciary are no friends of the entertainments industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I don't have much hope for that.
The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians.
Why do I feel that they're just gonna get a (hard) slap on the wrist for this?
As long as it gets before a judge it's going to hurt.
The Canadian Judiciary are no friends of the entertainments industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you. I thought I heard you say "argue against it" instead of "buy off their accusers/judges/jurors."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you .
I thought I heard you say " argue against it " instead of " buy off their accusers/judges/jurors .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you.
I thought I heard you say "argue against it" instead of "buy off their accusers/judges/jurors.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360986</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260201060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget reorganization. How about banishment from Canada for the infringing companies, and expulsion for all Company board members from holding a Corporate officer, or member position in Canada. THAT might send a message to these assholes, and any who linger in this industry or any other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget reorganization .
How about banishment from Canada for the infringing companies , and expulsion for all Company board members from holding a Corporate officer , or member position in Canada .
THAT might send a message to these assholes , and any who linger in this industry or any other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget reorganization.
How about banishment from Canada for the infringing companies, and expulsion for all Company board members from holding a Corporate officer, or member position in Canada.
THAT might send a message to these assholes, and any who linger in this industry or any other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360282</id>
	<title>They shouldn't worry</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260195840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's only in canadian $'s</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only in canadian $ 's</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only in canadian $'s</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359418</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>arbiter1</author>
	<datestamp>1260189480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its a bitch when the rules and damage ammount you get set for things comes back to royally bite you in the ass as it has for CRIA</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a bitch when the rules and damage ammount you get set for things comes back to royally bite you in the ass as it has for CRIA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a bitch when the rules and damage ammount you get set for things comes back to royally bite you in the ass as it has for CRIA</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359832</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Drishmung</author>
	<datestamp>1260192180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Enough suits like this, and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives, and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.</p></div><p>But, why bother?</p><p>I would be interested to know what value the record companies provide. If they were to cease to exist, would they be missed? This is not necessarily a hypothetical question, as there are strong indications that the major record companies may in fact cease to exist. That being the case, is it useful to examine what value they bring to:</p><ol> <li>The artists?</li><li>the consumers?</li><li>society as a whole?</li></ol><p> (Depending on your political stripe you may or may not value the third item at all).</p><p>In the past a case could be made that the labels served a useful purpose, They smoothed out artists earning, so that they got paid regularly; they provided recording studios and producers and physical media and distribution when all of these were rare and expensive. They provided publicity and management that talent scouts that arguably did nurture new talent.</p><p>Is this the case today?</p><p>Does the economy or society benefit or not from the music industry (as presently constituted)?</p><p>By the way, if you wish to argue that point three <i>has</i> no value, and no consideration whatsoever need be given to any so called 'rights' of society in this private transaction between parties---then you had best recall that copyright itself is an unnatural right granted by society. A limited monopoly granted for the express purpose of encouraging the creation of works for the common good. If society has no interest in the transaction, then there is no basis for the transaction.</p><p>Note: while obviously taking a position to encourage debate I'm <b>not</b> trying to prejudge here. I'm not close enough to the industry to know the answers: do the artists actually benefit from the labels these days?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Enough suits like this , and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives , and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.But , why bother ? I would be interested to know what value the record companies provide .
If they were to cease to exist , would they be missed ?
This is not necessarily a hypothetical question , as there are strong indications that the major record companies may in fact cease to exist .
That being the case , is it useful to examine what value they bring to : The artists ? the consumers ? society as a whole ?
( Depending on your political stripe you may or may not value the third item at all ) .In the past a case could be made that the labels served a useful purpose , They smoothed out artists earning , so that they got paid regularly ; they provided recording studios and producers and physical media and distribution when all of these were rare and expensive .
They provided publicity and management that talent scouts that arguably did nurture new talent.Is this the case today ? Does the economy or society benefit or not from the music industry ( as presently constituted ) ? By the way , if you wish to argue that point three has no value , and no consideration whatsoever need be given to any so called 'rights ' of society in this private transaction between parties---then you had best recall that copyright itself is an unnatural right granted by society .
A limited monopoly granted for the express purpose of encouraging the creation of works for the common good .
If society has no interest in the transaction , then there is no basis for the transaction.Note : while obviously taking a position to encourage debate I 'm not trying to prejudge here .
I 'm not close enough to the industry to know the answers : do the artists actually benefit from the labels these days ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enough suits like this, and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives, and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.But, why bother?I would be interested to know what value the record companies provide.
If they were to cease to exist, would they be missed?
This is not necessarily a hypothetical question, as there are strong indications that the major record companies may in fact cease to exist.
That being the case, is it useful to examine what value they bring to: The artists?the consumers?society as a whole?
(Depending on your political stripe you may or may not value the third item at all).In the past a case could be made that the labels served a useful purpose, They smoothed out artists earning, so that they got paid regularly; they provided recording studios and producers and physical media and distribution when all of these were rare and expensive.
They provided publicity and management that talent scouts that arguably did nurture new talent.Is this the case today?Does the economy or society benefit or not from the music industry (as presently constituted)?By the way, if you wish to argue that point three has no value, and no consideration whatsoever need be given to any so called 'rights' of society in this private transaction between parties---then you had best recall that copyright itself is an unnatural right granted by society.
A limited monopoly granted for the express purpose of encouraging the creation of works for the common good.
If society has no interest in the transaction, then there is no basis for the transaction.Note: while obviously taking a position to encourage debate I'm not trying to prejudge here.
I'm not close enough to the industry to know the answers: do the artists actually benefit from the labels these days?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361420</id>
	<title>Re:Do as I say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260204660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hopefully, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard\_Madoff" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">with this guy</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully , with this guy [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully, with this guy [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362666</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260304980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me. They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place.</i> <br> <br>After the MPAA was caught pirating a movie, with both the MPAA &amp; the RIAA having been caught pirating software it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.<br> <br> <i>And here's the kicker -- it's not casual copying or sharing -- it's massive for-profit piracy.</i> <br> <br>With this going on for 20 odd years.<br> <br> <i>There should be criminal charges filed, prison time served</i> <br> <br>Does Canadian law allow for "corporate people" to be imprisoned?<br> <br> <i>and a massive reorganization of the companies charged.</i> <br> <br>Even paying a fraction of the proposed amount would probably leave the companies involved so insolvent that liquidation would be the only possibility.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me .
They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place .
After the MPAA was caught pirating a movie , with both the MPAA &amp; the RIAA having been caught pirating software it was only a matter of time before something like this happened .
And here 's the kicker -- it 's not casual copying or sharing -- it 's massive for-profit piracy .
With this going on for 20 odd years .
There should be criminal charges filed , prison time served Does Canadian law allow for " corporate people " to be imprisoned ?
and a massive reorganization of the companies charged .
Even paying a fraction of the proposed amount would probably leave the companies involved so insolvent that liquidation would be the only possibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me.
They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place.
After the MPAA was caught pirating a movie, with both the MPAA &amp; the RIAA having been caught pirating software it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.
And here's the kicker -- it's not casual copying or sharing -- it's massive for-profit piracy.
With this going on for 20 odd years.
There should be criminal charges filed, prison time served  Does Canadian law allow for "corporate people" to be imprisoned?
and a massive reorganization of the companies charged.
Even paying a fraction of the proposed amount would probably leave the companies involved so insolvent that liquidation would be the only possibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360226</id>
	<title>CORRECTION: $6 billion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260195420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mistake there somewhere: the correct figure is $6 billion, NOT $60 bil.  See here: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4595/159/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mistake there somewhere : the correct figure is $ 6 billion , NOT $ 60 bil .
See here : http : //www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4595/159/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mistake there somewhere: the correct figure is $6 billion, NOT $60 bil.
See here: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4595/159/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359476</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>agbinfo</author>
	<datestamp>1260189780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IANAL but even if they manage to settle this case without divulging the amount per song paid, wouldn't an individual that gets sued by the CRIA be entitled to obtain this information through discovery?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL but even if they manage to settle this case without divulging the amount per song paid , would n't an individual that gets sued by the CRIA be entitled to obtain this information through discovery ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL but even if they manage to settle this case without divulging the amount per song paid, wouldn't an individual that gets sued by the CRIA be entitled to obtain this information through discovery?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359408</id>
	<title>Re:Irony (Planet of the Apes)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260189360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this the essential plot of Planet of the Apes (the real one, not that shoddy remake). A man, with no interest in humanity, suddenly has to defend the human race as being superior, to a religious zealot who believes that God created Ape in his own image.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this the essential plot of Planet of the Apes ( the real one , not that shoddy remake ) .
A man , with no interest in humanity , suddenly has to defend the human race as being superior , to a religious zealot who believes that God created Ape in his own image .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this the essential plot of Planet of the Apes (the real one, not that shoddy remake).
A man, with no interest in humanity, suddenly has to defend the human race as being superior, to a religious zealot who believes that God created Ape in his own image.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359822</id>
	<title>Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>Shabazz Rabbinowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1260192060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hear, hear. As Guy Forsyth once said (while still with the Asylum Street Spankers):<br>
<br>
"I would like to talk about something called 'Musical Darwinism.' If you go see a band, and they suck? Don't tip. That way, they'll die and next week there'll be another band. But if you see a band that you like, Ladies and Gentlemen, give dearly."

(<a href="http://www.archive.org/details/ass1996-02-21.flac" title="archive.org" rel="nofollow">Track 11</a> [archive.org])</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hear , hear .
As Guy Forsyth once said ( while still with the Asylum Street Spankers ) : " I would like to talk about something called 'Musical Darwinism .
' If you go see a band , and they suck ?
Do n't tip .
That way , they 'll die and next week there 'll be another band .
But if you see a band that you like , Ladies and Gentlemen , give dearly .
" ( Track 11 [ archive.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hear, hear.
As Guy Forsyth once said (while still with the Asylum Street Spankers):

"I would like to talk about something called 'Musical Darwinism.
' If you go see a band, and they suck?
Don't tip.
That way, they'll die and next week there'll be another band.
But if you see a band that you like, Ladies and Gentlemen, give dearly.
"

(Track 11 [archive.org])</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136</id>
	<title>Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Maxwell</author>
	<datestamp>1260187980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA.  They simply can't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision. If they 'win' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose, well, they lose big!</p><p>When they settle, they will have strong 'proof' that they 'represent the artists' and will use that to help their cause. This will be over in weeks, the actualy lawsuit is just a bargaining tactic.</p><p>Moving on...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA .
They simply ca n't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision .
If they 'win ' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose , well , they lose big ! When they settle , they will have strong 'proof ' that they 'represent the artists ' and will use that to help their cause .
This will be over in weeks , the actualy lawsuit is just a bargaining tactic.Moving on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA.
They simply can't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision.
If they 'win' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose, well, they lose big!When they settle, they will have strong 'proof' that they 'represent the artists' and will use that to help their cause.
This will be over in weeks, the actualy lawsuit is just a bargaining tactic.Moving on...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312</id>
	<title>CRIA will never get nailed for this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because here in Canada we have been following the same evolution of Capitalism that the US has adopted: companies (or groups of them) are superior to individuals and are held to a different standard. By all rights they should be forced to pay the billions in damages that they have earned by violating the laws they use as justification to get music downloaders to pay in court. They should get bit in the ass by the same principles they have been applying.<br>I am far too cynical to believe this will happen though, as I am sure many of you are. The right bribes will be paid to the right Canadian politicians and they will pay a few million in damages and that will be that. I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke (and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him. I am ashamed my country could possibly do so), and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour.<br>I sincerely hope I am wrong but I am far too cynical to think it will happen. We have government by corporation these days and they determine the laws and penalties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because here in Canada we have been following the same evolution of Capitalism that the US has adopted : companies ( or groups of them ) are superior to individuals and are held to a different standard .
By all rights they should be forced to pay the billions in damages that they have earned by violating the laws they use as justification to get music downloaders to pay in court .
They should get bit in the ass by the same principles they have been applying.I am far too cynical to believe this will happen though , as I am sure many of you are .
The right bribes will be paid to the right Canadian politicians and they will pay a few million in damages and that will be that .
I do n't trust Harper 's government further than I can puke ( and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him .
I am ashamed my country could possibly do so ) , and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour.I sincerely hope I am wrong but I am far too cynical to think it will happen .
We have government by corporation these days and they determine the laws and penalties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because here in Canada we have been following the same evolution of Capitalism that the US has adopted: companies (or groups of them) are superior to individuals and are held to a different standard.
By all rights they should be forced to pay the billions in damages that they have earned by violating the laws they use as justification to get music downloaders to pay in court.
They should get bit in the ass by the same principles they have been applying.I am far too cynical to believe this will happen though, as I am sure many of you are.
The right bribes will be paid to the right Canadian politicians and they will pay a few million in damages and that will be that.
I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke (and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him.
I am ashamed my country could possibly do so), and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour.I sincerely hope I am wrong but I am far too cynical to think it will happen.
We have government by corporation these days and they determine the laws and penalties.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369492</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1260305820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Minnesota Nice" in effect means "I will pretend to be nice to your face, and when you are not around talk shit and stab you in the back as much as possible". Basically most Minnesotans are very passive aggressive. I know -  I have lived there for 35 years of my life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Minnesota Nice " in effect means " I will pretend to be nice to your face , and when you are not around talk shit and stab you in the back as much as possible " .
Basically most Minnesotans are very passive aggressive .
I know - I have lived there for 35 years of my life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Minnesota Nice" in effect means "I will pretend to be nice to your face, and when you are not around talk shit and stab you in the back as much as possible".
Basically most Minnesotans are very passive aggressive.
I know -  I have lived there for 35 years of my life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362908</id>
	<title>I donno</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1260265560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>American copyright laws was originally created *specifically* because American publishers were not paying American authors.  I expect Canadian copyright laws actually has a longer tradition going back more directly to British common law, but the origin was still protecting artists from publishers.</p><p>I'd think the best reform for copyright law would be :</p><p>(1) publishers of unauthorized copyrighted works are liable for damages based upon their profits from the sale of those works, and their gross income, so individuals and startups are immune, should never make any money from infringement, and large companies cannot infringe at a lose even for the purpose of protecting market share.</p><p>(2) copyright does not extend beyond 7 years unless the source code is registered with the library of congress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>American copyright laws was originally created * specifically * because American publishers were not paying American authors .
I expect Canadian copyright laws actually has a longer tradition going back more directly to British common law , but the origin was still protecting artists from publishers.I 'd think the best reform for copyright law would be : ( 1 ) publishers of unauthorized copyrighted works are liable for damages based upon their profits from the sale of those works , and their gross income , so individuals and startups are immune , should never make any money from infringement , and large companies can not infringe at a lose even for the purpose of protecting market share .
( 2 ) copyright does not extend beyond 7 years unless the source code is registered with the library of congress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American copyright laws was originally created *specifically* because American publishers were not paying American authors.
I expect Canadian copyright laws actually has a longer tradition going back more directly to British common law, but the origin was still protecting artists from publishers.I'd think the best reform for copyright law would be :(1) publishers of unauthorized copyrighted works are liable for damages based upon their profits from the sale of those works, and their gross income, so individuals and startups are immune, should never make any money from infringement, and large companies cannot infringe at a lose even for the purpose of protecting market share.
(2) copyright does not extend beyond 7 years unless the source code is registered with the library of congress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361550</id>
	<title>Re:Do as I say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260205740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably paying their lawyers in the USA who are pursuing file-sharing cases...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably paying their lawyers in the USA who are pursuing file-sharing cases.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably paying their lawyers in the USA who are pursuing file-sharing cases...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361350</id>
	<title>Re:They deserve what they get</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260204180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you hate an organization because it fights copyright infringement but praise the law that will potentially end them for copyright infringement? Huh? It has to work one way or the other, if they're guilty than the people being brought in for copyright infringement are guilty and thus are in the wrong. Or if you feel that people who willingly break copyright are being wronged then you have to side with this organization.<br> <br>Either way you're just as much a hypocrite as the other. How does it feel to be on the same rotten shit barge after all?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you hate an organization because it fights copyright infringement but praise the law that will potentially end them for copyright infringement ?
Huh ? It has to work one way or the other , if they 're guilty than the people being brought in for copyright infringement are guilty and thus are in the wrong .
Or if you feel that people who willingly break copyright are being wronged then you have to side with this organization .
Either way you 're just as much a hypocrite as the other .
How does it feel to be on the same rotten shit barge after all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you hate an organization because it fights copyright infringement but praise the law that will potentially end them for copyright infringement?
Huh? It has to work one way or the other, if they're guilty than the people being brought in for copyright infringement are guilty and thus are in the wrong.
Or if you feel that people who willingly break copyright are being wronged then you have to side with this organization.
Either way you're just as much a hypocrite as the other.
How does it feel to be on the same rotten shit barge after all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359266</id>
	<title>Just remember....</title>
	<author>mrthoughtful</author>
	<datestamp>1260188520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Always - I mean always - be careful what you wish for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Always - I mean always - be careful what you wish for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always - I mean always - be careful what you wish for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359938</id>
	<title>It occurs to me that there was some odd truth told</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1260193020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In all the years of whining and complaining about needing stricter laws and harsher punishment and longer copyright terms, they always cited that the artists and their families are not getting paid because of piracy!</p><p>Well, I guess they weren't exactly lying were they.  It's just that the people they claimed to be responsible for the atrocities against artists were not the file sharing public, but themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In all the years of whining and complaining about needing stricter laws and harsher punishment and longer copyright terms , they always cited that the artists and their families are not getting paid because of piracy ! Well , I guess they were n't exactly lying were they .
It 's just that the people they claimed to be responsible for the atrocities against artists were not the file sharing public , but themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In all the years of whining and complaining about needing stricter laws and harsher punishment and longer copyright terms, they always cited that the artists and their families are not getting paid because of piracy!Well, I guess they weren't exactly lying were they.
It's just that the people they claimed to be responsible for the atrocities against artists were not the file sharing public, but themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359056</id>
	<title>Meet The Old Boss... Same As The New Boss...</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1260187680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this is going to do is to convince CRIA to up the amount of money and the number of hookers it sends to Ottawa to "persuade" Parliament to pass unbalanced draconian laws that</p><p>a. Further criminalize consumers<br>b. Abrogate all the sins of Big Media</p><p>Look at the history of the North American recording industry.  They've been ripping off artists for years.  Bo Diddley was scammed out of millions in royalties by faulty userous contracts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this is going to do is to convince CRIA to up the amount of money and the number of hookers it sends to Ottawa to " persuade " Parliament to pass unbalanced draconian laws thata .
Further criminalize consumersb .
Abrogate all the sins of Big MediaLook at the history of the North American recording industry .
They 've been ripping off artists for years .
Bo Diddley was scammed out of millions in royalties by faulty userous contracts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this is going to do is to convince CRIA to up the amount of money and the number of hookers it sends to Ottawa to "persuade" Parliament to pass unbalanced draconian laws thata.
Further criminalize consumersb.
Abrogate all the sins of Big MediaLook at the history of the North American recording industry.
They've been ripping off artists for years.
Bo Diddley was scammed out of millions in royalties by faulty userous contracts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363470</id>
	<title>... other forms of banditry</title>
	<author>catman</author>
	<datestamp>1260273960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was actually looking for another Discworld quote when this one popped up. I think it's appropriate:<blockquote><div><p>One reason for the bustle was that over large parts of the continent other people preferred to make money without working at all, and since the Disc had yet to develop a music recording industry they were forced to fall back on older, more traditional forms of banditry.</p></div>
</blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was actually looking for another Discworld quote when this one popped up .
I think it 's appropriate : One reason for the bustle was that over large parts of the continent other people preferred to make money without working at all , and since the Disc had yet to develop a music recording industry they were forced to fall back on older , more traditional forms of banditry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was actually looking for another Discworld quote when this one popped up.
I think it's appropriate:One reason for the bustle was that over large parts of the continent other people preferred to make money without working at all, and since the Disc had yet to develop a music recording industry they were forced to fall back on older, more traditional forms of banditry.

	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360034</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1260193680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take a major stake in a company run by people you don't trust?</p><p>The only stakes I'd want would be a controlling stake or a stake in the CEO's heart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a major stake in a company run by people you do n't trust ? The only stakes I 'd want would be a controlling stake or a stake in the CEO 's heart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a major stake in a company run by people you don't trust?The only stakes I'd want would be a controlling stake or a stake in the CEO's heart.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360244</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>unix1</author>
	<datestamp>1260195540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nonsense. We all know that if you pay for the law that law cannot be used against you - it's like you are the owner of the law and you can direct the minions to use it as you see fit. That was not the case for the GM from what you describe.</p><p>So, don't be expecting the "copyright police" busting down doors, shutting down any major labels and arresting any of their executives to make examples out of. That's not how the corporate representation in government works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nonsense .
We all know that if you pay for the law that law can not be used against you - it 's like you are the owner of the law and you can direct the minions to use it as you see fit .
That was not the case for the GM from what you describe.So , do n't be expecting the " copyright police " busting down doors , shutting down any major labels and arresting any of their executives to make examples out of .
That 's not how the corporate representation in government works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nonsense.
We all know that if you pay for the law that law cannot be used against you - it's like you are the owner of the law and you can direct the minions to use it as you see fit.
That was not the case for the GM from what you describe.So, don't be expecting the "copyright police" busting down doors, shutting down any major labels and arresting any of their executives to make examples out of.
That's not how the corporate representation in government works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30364370</id>
	<title>$6 Billion, not $60 Billion</title>
	<author>Genwil</author>
	<datestamp>1260283500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Prof. Geist tweeted on Monday that the correct figure is $6 Billion and not $60B, but it is still a lot of cash. They have shown how greedy they are and single-mindedly in pursuit of the dollar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Prof. Geist tweeted on Monday that the correct figure is $ 6 Billion and not $ 60B , but it is still a lot of cash .
They have shown how greedy they are and single-mindedly in pursuit of the dollar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prof. Geist tweeted on Monday that the correct figure is $6 Billion and not $60B, but it is still a lot of cash.
They have shown how greedy they are and single-mindedly in pursuit of the dollar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363260</id>
	<title>It's still our fault!</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1260270600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this ever comes to the UK (law may not allow it), it'll still be the consumers' fault.<br> <br>Much like viewing indecent images of children is "creating a market" for child abuse images, obviously listening to music which is improperly licensed is "creating a market" for recording industry infringement!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this ever comes to the UK ( law may not allow it ) , it 'll still be the consumers ' fault .
Much like viewing indecent images of children is " creating a market " for child abuse images , obviously listening to music which is improperly licensed is " creating a market " for recording industry infringement !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this ever comes to the UK (law may not allow it), it'll still be the consumers' fault.
Much like viewing indecent images of children is "creating a market" for child abuse images, obviously listening to music which is improperly licensed is "creating a market" for recording industry infringement!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359784</id>
	<title>Re:Raise your hand if ...</title>
	<author>MSesow</author>
	<datestamp>1260191880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my limited slice of experience, the only times I have seen large corporations behave honestly is when a) there is a law explicitly telling them they must be (like nutritional information and ingredients in food), or b) there is some sort of marketing they can get out of it.  In either case, not being honest would cost them money, and given that the sole purpose of a corporation is to generate profit it should be no surprise that the too-common view is to cut as many corners as you can to maximise that profit.  Sure there are some exceptions I have seen, but when generally speaking about the corporate world, they are the candle of hope floating in the ocean of greed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my limited slice of experience , the only times I have seen large corporations behave honestly is when a ) there is a law explicitly telling them they must be ( like nutritional information and ingredients in food ) , or b ) there is some sort of marketing they can get out of it .
In either case , not being honest would cost them money , and given that the sole purpose of a corporation is to generate profit it should be no surprise that the too-common view is to cut as many corners as you can to maximise that profit .
Sure there are some exceptions I have seen , but when generally speaking about the corporate world , they are the candle of hope floating in the ocean of greed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my limited slice of experience, the only times I have seen large corporations behave honestly is when a) there is a law explicitly telling them they must be (like nutritional information and ingredients in food), or b) there is some sort of marketing they can get out of it.
In either case, not being honest would cost them money, and given that the sole purpose of a corporation is to generate profit it should be no surprise that the too-common view is to cut as many corners as you can to maximise that profit.
Sure there are some exceptions I have seen, but when generally speaking about the corporate world, they are the candle of hope floating in the ocean of greed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144</id>
	<title>justification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait, so the majors have been selling CDs for over <b>thirty years</b> with songs they don't own the copyright on??  They've been charging consumers for something they didn't own?</p><p>And they wonder why consumers are downloading music...</p><p>In retrospect, I don't think we've been pirating music at all over the past decade or so. We're all just small record labels that have been creating (very limited run) compilation CDs and putting the songs on our own 'pending lists'. We fully intend to pay the rights holders, once we can locate them and negotiate rights. Brilliant idea, guys! Thanks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , so the majors have been selling CDs for over thirty years with songs they do n't own the copyright on ? ?
They 've been charging consumers for something they did n't own ? And they wonder why consumers are downloading music...In retrospect , I do n't think we 've been pirating music at all over the past decade or so .
We 're all just small record labels that have been creating ( very limited run ) compilation CDs and putting the songs on our own 'pending lists' .
We fully intend to pay the rights holders , once we can locate them and negotiate rights .
Brilliant idea , guys !
Thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, so the majors have been selling CDs for over thirty years with songs they don't own the copyright on??
They've been charging consumers for something they didn't own?And they wonder why consumers are downloading music...In retrospect, I don't think we've been pirating music at all over the past decade or so.
We're all just small record labels that have been creating (very limited run) compilation CDs and putting the songs on our own 'pending lists'.
We fully intend to pay the rights holders, once we can locate them and negotiate rights.
Brilliant idea, guys!
Thanks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360048</id>
	<title>So, let me get this right..</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1260193800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..the CRIA were taking people to court for choosing piracy over handling stolen goods?  I mean, if you take something and sell it on without paying for it that is called stealing, no?</p><p>Well, I'm with a previous poster here: 10 violations per song is ridiculously low given some of the artists on that list.  The have the exact figures, so use them.  If they cannot produce those numbers that implies guilt anyway, because those same numbers are required to PAY the rights - not having the numbers would demonstrate a lack of intention to ever pay out.</p><p>Time to break out the popcorn, I think.  This could get entertaining.  Any chance of a repeat in the US?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..the CRIA were taking people to court for choosing piracy over handling stolen goods ?
I mean , if you take something and sell it on without paying for it that is called stealing , no ? Well , I 'm with a previous poster here : 10 violations per song is ridiculously low given some of the artists on that list .
The have the exact figures , so use them .
If they can not produce those numbers that implies guilt anyway , because those same numbers are required to PAY the rights - not having the numbers would demonstrate a lack of intention to ever pay out.Time to break out the popcorn , I think .
This could get entertaining .
Any chance of a repeat in the US ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..the CRIA were taking people to court for choosing piracy over handling stolen goods?
I mean, if you take something and sell it on without paying for it that is called stealing, no?Well, I'm with a previous poster here: 10 violations per song is ridiculously low given some of the artists on that list.
The have the exact figures, so use them.
If they cannot produce those numbers that implies guilt anyway, because those same numbers are required to PAY the rights - not having the numbers would demonstrate a lack of intention to ever pay out.Time to break out the popcorn, I think.
This could get entertaining.
Any chance of a repeat in the US?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</id>
	<title>Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if this will eventually turn out like GM and its dealings with the unions over the years.  Bear with me...</p><p>GM corp. and shareholders spent decades working out deals with the unions, trying to minimize labor costs.  They made deal after deal that would do things like promise better pensions, all to keep current costs down.</p><p>Then, when it all came crashing down, the net result was that the labor union ends up as a major (the major, after the government) shareholder in the company.  All that effort goes to naught when it resulted in the "little people" gaining complete control of the company.</p><p>So I'm reminded of it here because the CRIA and RIAA and their kind have spent years creating the webs of copyright law that they now use to sue their customers.  It would be fitting and just if those same laws lead to the "little people" - the artists - taking control of the industry.</p><p>Were I an artist in this case, I'd readily accept a major stake in the company in lieu of the settlement, especially if it was likely that the settlement would force them into bankruptcy and I'd never see my money anyway.  Enough suits like this, and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives, and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if this will eventually turn out like GM and its dealings with the unions over the years .
Bear with me...GM corp. and shareholders spent decades working out deals with the unions , trying to minimize labor costs .
They made deal after deal that would do things like promise better pensions , all to keep current costs down.Then , when it all came crashing down , the net result was that the labor union ends up as a major ( the major , after the government ) shareholder in the company .
All that effort goes to naught when it resulted in the " little people " gaining complete control of the company.So I 'm reminded of it here because the CRIA and RIAA and their kind have spent years creating the webs of copyright law that they now use to sue their customers .
It would be fitting and just if those same laws lead to the " little people " - the artists - taking control of the industry.Were I an artist in this case , I 'd readily accept a major stake in the company in lieu of the settlement , especially if it was likely that the settlement would force them into bankruptcy and I 'd never see my money anyway .
Enough suits like this , and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives , and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if this will eventually turn out like GM and its dealings with the unions over the years.
Bear with me...GM corp. and shareholders spent decades working out deals with the unions, trying to minimize labor costs.
They made deal after deal that would do things like promise better pensions, all to keep current costs down.Then, when it all came crashing down, the net result was that the labor union ends up as a major (the major, after the government) shareholder in the company.
All that effort goes to naught when it resulted in the "little people" gaining complete control of the company.So I'm reminded of it here because the CRIA and RIAA and their kind have spent years creating the webs of copyright law that they now use to sue their customers.
It would be fitting and just if those same laws lead to the "little people" - the artists - taking control of the industry.Were I an artist in this case, I'd readily accept a major stake in the company in lieu of the settlement, especially if it was likely that the settlement would force them into bankruptcy and I'd never see my money anyway.
Enough suits like this, and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives, and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359844</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>m.ducharme</author>
	<datestamp>1260192240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keep in mind that it's a class action settlement. Those are generally a matter of public record. Decision or not, settling this one is basically painting a big old target on their back.</p><p>They won't have much proof that they serve the artists, as it's the artists that are suing the labels. I don't think they'll be able to spin that one so easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keep in mind that it 's a class action settlement .
Those are generally a matter of public record .
Decision or not , settling this one is basically painting a big old target on their back.They wo n't have much proof that they serve the artists , as it 's the artists that are suing the labels .
I do n't think they 'll be able to spin that one so easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keep in mind that it's a class action settlement.
Those are generally a matter of public record.
Decision or not, settling this one is basically painting a big old target on their back.They won't have much proof that they serve the artists, as it's the artists that are suing the labels.
I don't think they'll be able to spin that one so easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358</id>
	<title>Re:justification</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1260189060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Brilliant idea, guys! Thanks!</p></div><p>Only if they actually get away with it; otherwise they might still be on the hook for those statutory damages. IANAL, but what happens if they plaintiffs prevail and Warner, Sony, et al refuse to pay? I doubt their assets in Canada exceed $60 billion so what is to prevent them from simply leaving Canada entirely and abandoning whatever they cannot take with them?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Brilliant idea , guys !
Thanks ! Only if they actually get away with it ; otherwise they might still be on the hook for those statutory damages .
IANAL , but what happens if they plaintiffs prevail and Warner , Sony , et al refuse to pay ?
I doubt their assets in Canada exceed $ 60 billion so what is to prevent them from simply leaving Canada entirely and abandoning whatever they can not take with them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Brilliant idea, guys!
Thanks!Only if they actually get away with it; otherwise they might still be on the hook for those statutory damages.
IANAL, but what happens if they plaintiffs prevail and Warner, Sony, et al refuse to pay?
I doubt their assets in Canada exceed $60 billion so what is to prevent them from simply leaving Canada entirely and abandoning whatever they cannot take with them?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30365294</id>
	<title>Media Tax</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1260288060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be honest when I started reading this article, I thought it was about the fact that in Canada we pay a tax on every piece of digital media that ASSUMES that we will pirate music on it. Compact Discs, DVD, iPods, thumb drives, etc... everything assumes every Canadian is pirating music on every type of digital media. The part that I thought they were getting sued about is that they (the CRIA) gets this money and is *supposed* to distribute this money according to some formula to artists. Over the decade that this has been taking place, how much of that money has made it to artists do you suppose? I am going to go out on a limb and say zero. The amount is huge by now I am sure, and I doubt they have distributed to anyone except their own pockets, lobbyists, lawyers, and politicians.</p><p>I guess that class action suit is still pending...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest when I started reading this article , I thought it was about the fact that in Canada we pay a tax on every piece of digital media that ASSUMES that we will pirate music on it .
Compact Discs , DVD , iPods , thumb drives , etc... everything assumes every Canadian is pirating music on every type of digital media .
The part that I thought they were getting sued about is that they ( the CRIA ) gets this money and is * supposed * to distribute this money according to some formula to artists .
Over the decade that this has been taking place , how much of that money has made it to artists do you suppose ?
I am going to go out on a limb and say zero .
The amount is huge by now I am sure , and I doubt they have distributed to anyone except their own pockets , lobbyists , lawyers , and politicians.I guess that class action suit is still pending.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest when I started reading this article, I thought it was about the fact that in Canada we pay a tax on every piece of digital media that ASSUMES that we will pirate music on it.
Compact Discs, DVD, iPods, thumb drives, etc... everything assumes every Canadian is pirating music on every type of digital media.
The part that I thought they were getting sued about is that they (the CRIA) gets this money and is *supposed* to distribute this money according to some formula to artists.
Over the decade that this has been taking place, how much of that money has made it to artists do you suppose?
I am going to go out on a limb and say zero.
The amount is huge by now I am sure, and I doubt they have distributed to anyone except their own pockets, lobbyists, lawyers, and politicians.I guess that class action suit is still pending...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360850</id>
	<title>Petard, meet hoist</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1260199920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Okay, imagine some archeologist of the distant future, researching the quaint copyright laws of the 20th and 21st century<br>
&nbsp; ("Who were Sonny Mouse and Mickey Bono?") coming across this in the partially restored digital records?</p><p>
&nbsp; Truth is truly stranger than fiction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Okay , imagine some archeologist of the distant future , researching the quaint copyright laws of the 20th and 21st century   ( " Who were Sonny Mouse and Mickey Bono ?
" ) coming across this in the partially restored digital records ?
  Truth is truly stranger than fiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Okay, imagine some archeologist of the distant future, researching the quaint copyright laws of the 20th and 21st century
  ("Who were Sonny Mouse and Mickey Bono?
") coming across this in the partially restored digital records?
  Truth is truly stranger than fiction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359100</id>
	<title>Estoppel in America (and hopefully Canada)</title>
	<author>Foobar of Borg</author>
	<datestamp>1260187800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>In American law, if you admit something on the record (AFAIK, IANAL, DSB [disclaimers suck balls]), you are prohibited from disclaiming it later.  So, if they admit that a single song is worth, say, $75k, then they will just have to suck it up when they do the same thing.  Now, if they can simply throw Bitch Mainwol in jail for a number of years, I would say that justice has been served.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In American law , if you admit something on the record ( AFAIK , IANAL , DSB [ disclaimers suck balls ] ) , you are prohibited from disclaiming it later .
So , if they admit that a single song is worth , say , $ 75k , then they will just have to suck it up when they do the same thing .
Now , if they can simply throw Bitch Mainwol in jail for a number of years , I would say that justice has been served .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In American law, if you admit something on the record (AFAIK, IANAL, DSB [disclaimers suck balls]), you are prohibited from disclaiming it later.
So, if they admit that a single song is worth, say, $75k, then they will just have to suck it up when they do the same thing.
Now, if they can simply throw Bitch Mainwol in jail for a number of years, I would say that justice has been served.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359386</id>
	<title>Worldwide practice</title>
	<author>XSforMe</author>
	<datestamp>1260189240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The big labels have been pulling this stunt world wide during years. Recently in Mexico, <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/sony-music-office-raided-090907/" title="torrentfreak.com">Police raided the major offices of Sony</a> [torrentfreak.com] after it decided to tell Alejandro Fernandez (a Mexican folk country singer) they were going to publish some of his tunes with or without his permission. After the smoke had settled, the Police seiged over 6K pirated CDs from the same offices of those who can't keep their mouth shut when it comes to bashing pirates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The big labels have been pulling this stunt world wide during years .
Recently in Mexico , Police raided the major offices of Sony [ torrentfreak.com ] after it decided to tell Alejandro Fernandez ( a Mexican folk country singer ) they were going to publish some of his tunes with or without his permission .
After the smoke had settled , the Police seiged over 6K pirated CDs from the same offices of those who ca n't keep their mouth shut when it comes to bashing pirates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The big labels have been pulling this stunt world wide during years.
Recently in Mexico, Police raided the major offices of Sony [torrentfreak.com] after it decided to tell Alejandro Fernandez (a Mexican folk country singer) they were going to publish some of his tunes with or without his permission.
After the smoke had settled, the Police seiged over 6K pirated CDs from the same offices of those who can't keep their mouth shut when it comes to bashing pirates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274</id>
	<title>Do as I say...</title>
	<author>gzearfoss</author>
	<datestamp>1260188580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict that the CRIA will have a sudden change in heart about copyright violation enforcement - that will last as long as it takes to get this case dropped or settled.  Then, it'll be back to business as usual.</p><p>The question is, where did the money for the royalties from these CDs end up?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict that the CRIA will have a sudden change in heart about copyright violation enforcement - that will last as long as it takes to get this case dropped or settled .
Then , it 'll be back to business as usual.The question is , where did the money for the royalties from these CDs end up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict that the CRIA will have a sudden change in heart about copyright violation enforcement - that will last as long as it takes to get this case dropped or settled.
Then, it'll be back to business as usual.The question is, where did the money for the royalties from these CDs end up?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361800</id>
	<title>Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260208380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's exactly right.  I stopped buying music the minute I saw news of the big corporations suing fans.  Haven't bought any other than artist direct since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's exactly right .
I stopped buying music the minute I saw news of the big corporations suing fans .
Have n't bought any other than artist direct since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's exactly right.
I stopped buying music the minute I saw news of the big corporations suing fans.
Haven't bought any other than artist direct since.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362354</id>
	<title>Re:CRIA? same as RIAA: they're WESU !</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1260214320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attention, my friends! Don't listen to the parent poster! This innocent-sounding WESU, is nothing but a mask, a sock puppet, a misdirection, for the Warner, EMI, Sony, and Universal, the people behind the notorious RIAA and CRIA! Notice their transparent attempt to change their name to something as innocuous as WESU.</p><p>I say we should refer  to them, in full, as <i>Adorable Puppy Murderers and Crippled Child Rapists International</i> from now on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attention , my friends !
Do n't listen to the parent poster !
This innocent-sounding WESU , is nothing but a mask , a sock puppet , a misdirection , for the Warner , EMI , Sony , and Universal , the people behind the notorious RIAA and CRIA !
Notice their transparent attempt to change their name to something as innocuous as WESU.I say we should refer to them , in full , as Adorable Puppy Murderers and Crippled Child Rapists International from now on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attention, my friends!
Don't listen to the parent poster!
This innocent-sounding WESU, is nothing but a mask, a sock puppet, a misdirection, for the Warner, EMI, Sony, and Universal, the people behind the notorious RIAA and CRIA!
Notice their transparent attempt to change their name to something as innocuous as WESU.I say we should refer  to them, in full, as Adorable Puppy Murderers and Crippled Child Rapists International from now on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363506</id>
	<title>WESU  - I love it</title>
	<author>Smegly</author>
	<datestamp>1260274380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU!</p></div><p>Excellent idea! Exposed sunlight for long enough into dark places, will kill the vermin living and multiplying there...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU ! Excellent idea !
Exposed sunlight for long enough into dark places , will kill the vermin living and multiplying there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU!Excellent idea!
Exposed sunlight for long enough into dark places, will kill the vermin living and multiplying there...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362256</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260213300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>th@s not copyright infringement, th@s fraud and may even be criminal recklessness</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>th @ s not copyright infringement , th @ s fraud and may even be criminal recklessness</tokentext>
<sentencetext>th@s not copyright infringement, th@s fraud and may even be criminal recklessness</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359562</id>
	<title>Re:They deserve what they get</title>
	<author>CaptainTure</author>
	<datestamp>1260190380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone know if there are similar practises in the United States, UK or Australia?<br> <br>

--<br>
chendry@auzip.com -- don't worry it's OK, it's there on purpose<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:0</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone know if there are similar practises in the United States , UK or Australia ?
-- chendry @ auzip.com -- do n't worry it 's OK , it 's there on purpose : 0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone know if there are similar practises in the United States, UK or Australia?
--
chendry@auzip.com -- don't worry it's OK, it's there on purpose :0</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359712</id>
	<title>Hey CRIA!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260191340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CRIA me a river!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CRIA me a river !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CRIA me a river!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360912</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>TangoMargarine</author>
	<datestamp>1260200460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, power corrupts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , power corrupts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, power corrupts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018</id>
	<title>We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So that the artists might be more directly ripped off by the filesharing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So that the artists might be more directly ripped off by the filesharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that the artists might be more directly ripped off by the filesharing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360330</id>
	<title>Re:justification</title>
	<author>Luthair</author>
	<datestamp>1260196200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Presumably their back catalogues are worth something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably their back catalogues are worth something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably their back catalogues are worth something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359240</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please, please, please let the recording industry lose and learn a goddamn lesson! But I don't have much hope for that. The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians. Why do I feel that they're just gonna get a (hard) slap on the wrist for this?</p><p>Remember, this is the same Sony that rootkitted millions of PCs in the US and Canada and got off with "those who purchased an XCP CD will be paid $7.50 per purchased recording and given the opportunity to download a free album, or be able to download three additional albums from a limited list of recordings if they give up their cash incentive." That $7.50 includes being at fault for copyright infringement for including GPL code in their rootkit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please , please , please let the recording industry lose and learn a goddamn lesson !
But I do n't have much hope for that .
The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians .
Why do I feel that they 're just gon na get a ( hard ) slap on the wrist for this ? Remember , this is the same Sony that rootkitted millions of PCs in the US and Canada and got off with " those who purchased an XCP CD will be paid $ 7.50 per purchased recording and given the opportunity to download a free album , or be able to download three additional albums from a limited list of recordings if they give up their cash incentive .
" That $ 7.50 includes being at fault for copyright infringement for including GPL code in their rootkit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please, please, please let the recording industry lose and learn a goddamn lesson!
But I don't have much hope for that.
The same industry that bankrupts individuals over a little file sharing also lobbies and donates funds to politicians.
Why do I feel that they're just gonna get a (hard) slap on the wrist for this?Remember, this is the same Sony that rootkitted millions of PCs in the US and Canada and got off with "those who purchased an XCP CD will be paid $7.50 per purchased recording and given the opportunity to download a free album, or be able to download three additional albums from a limited list of recordings if they give up their cash incentive.
" That $7.50 includes being at fault for copyright infringement for including GPL code in their rootkit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260190620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>er... wait, are we talking about the same GM that would pay unskilled laborers $20/hour to weld parts?</p><p>During a time when Minimum Wage was $5?</p><p>Your definition of "minimize" seriously needs to be looked at.</p><p>Diclaimer: I live and work in the Lansing, MI area... which is a GM town.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>er... wait , are we talking about the same GM that would pay unskilled laborers $ 20/hour to weld parts ? During a time when Minimum Wage was $ 5 ? Your definition of " minimize " seriously needs to be looked at.Diclaimer : I live and work in the Lansing , MI area... which is a GM town .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>er... wait, are we talking about the same GM that would pay unskilled laborers $20/hour to weld parts?During a time when Minimum Wage was $5?Your definition of "minimize" seriously needs to be looked at.Diclaimer: I live and work in the Lansing, MI area... which is a GM town.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359746</id>
	<title>Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1260191580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.</p></div></blockquote><p>It works that way for me. For several years now I've been buying music from artists who sell it directly, and using TPB for RIAA music. Though frankly, I seem to require less and less RIAA music as time goes by.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.It works that way for me .
For several years now I 've been buying music from artists who sell it directly , and using TPB for RIAA music .
Though frankly , I seem to require less and less RIAA music as time goes by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.It works that way for me.
For several years now I've been buying music from artists who sell it directly, and using TPB for RIAA music.
Though frankly, I seem to require less and less RIAA music as time goes by.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362428</id>
	<title>Re:CRIA? same as RIAA: they're WESU !</title>
	<author>roesti</author>
	<datestamp>1260215280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise, a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA, and suggested that we actually refer to them by name: <strong>W</strong>arner, <strong>E</strong>MI, <strong>S</strong>ony, and <strong>U</strong>niversal.  Together they form the acronym WESU, as in "We sue!  Yes, we do!"</p></div><p>That's for the US, though. This is the Canadian affiliate, WESUC.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise , a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA , and suggested that we actually refer to them by name : Warner , EMI , Sony , and Universal .
Together they form the acronym WESU , as in " We sue !
Yes , we do !
" That 's for the US , though .
This is the Canadian affiliate , WESUC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise, a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA, and suggested that we actually refer to them by name: Warner, EMI, Sony, and Universal.
Together they form the acronym WESU, as in "We sue!
Yes, we do!
"That's for the US, though.
This is the Canadian affiliate, WESUC.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360078</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260193920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're welcome to drive in a car welded by a douchebag making $7 an hour who previously worked at 7/11.</p><p>The rest of us, who don't live in your Ayn Rand jackoff fantasy world, prefer a car welded by somebody who knows what he's doing and actually gives a shit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're welcome to drive in a car welded by a douchebag making $ 7 an hour who previously worked at 7/11.The rest of us , who do n't live in your Ayn Rand jackoff fantasy world , prefer a car welded by somebody who knows what he 's doing and actually gives a shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're welcome to drive in a car welded by a douchebag making $7 an hour who previously worked at 7/11.The rest of us, who don't live in your Ayn Rand jackoff fantasy world, prefer a car welded by somebody who knows what he's doing and actually gives a shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142</id>
	<title>Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.  I don't know that for sure, but if I were a bettin' man I'd put money on it.  People have a natural aversion to $BIGCORP, but they have a natural affinity for their favorite artist.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist .
I do n't know that for sure , but if I were a bettin ' man I 'd put money on it .
People have a natural aversion to $ BIGCORP , but they have a natural affinity for their favorite artist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.
I don't know that for sure, but if I were a bettin' man I'd put money on it.
People have a natural aversion to $BIGCORP, but they have a natural affinity for their favorite artist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369142</id>
	<title>Re:wouldn't it be nice..</title>
	<author>alexo</author>
	<datestamp>1260304320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck, they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward, Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada. But I doubt it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not to worry, you'll get it via <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement" title="wikipedia.org">ACTA</a> [wikipedia.org] instead.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck , they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward , Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada .
But I doubt it.Not to worry , you 'll get it via ACTA [ wikipedia.org ] instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck, they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward, Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada.
But I doubt it.Not to worry, you'll get it via ACTA [wikipedia.org] instead.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362794</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>arkhan\_jg</author>
	<datestamp>1260263760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages, where each CD they sold would mean them owing $20,000 per song, PER CD. Instead, it's limited to per song.</i></p><p>That's not how statutory damages work.</p><p>There's three kinds of damages for copyright;</p><p>1) actual damages. This is where you work how much has been lost. So it would be the few cents per song per CD that was sold without permission that was owing on royalties. The difficulty of this in general though when it comes to copyright infringement is that you often don't know how many copies were distributed. So you have option 2,<br>2) statutory damages. This is a 'stand-in' figure for actual damages. They go - "we only caught bob the market trader with 2 copies of our CD. But he likely sold lots of copies, which we can't prove directly. So we'll ask for the statutory damages laid down in law instead". These are charged once per infringement (not per individual copy), but go from eye-watering to downright extortionate amounts, i.e. the $20,000 per track claimed for in this case. Of course, one reason they're so high is because the music industry lobbied for them to be.<br>3) punitive damages. This is where the court goes - "Ok, here's your (actual damages/statutory damages) fine to pay back for the financial harm you caused. Now here's an nice big extra punishment fine on top so you don't do it again, and neither does anybody else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages , where each CD they sold would mean them owing $ 20,000 per song , PER CD .
Instead , it 's limited to per song.That 's not how statutory damages work.There 's three kinds of damages for copyright ; 1 ) actual damages .
This is where you work how much has been lost .
So it would be the few cents per song per CD that was sold without permission that was owing on royalties .
The difficulty of this in general though when it comes to copyright infringement is that you often do n't know how many copies were distributed .
So you have option 2,2 ) statutory damages .
This is a 'stand-in ' figure for actual damages .
They go - " we only caught bob the market trader with 2 copies of our CD .
But he likely sold lots of copies , which we ca n't prove directly .
So we 'll ask for the statutory damages laid down in law instead " .
These are charged once per infringement ( not per individual copy ) , but go from eye-watering to downright extortionate amounts , i.e .
the $ 20,000 per track claimed for in this case .
Of course , one reason they 're so high is because the music industry lobbied for them to be.3 ) punitive damages .
This is where the court goes - " Ok , here 's your ( actual damages/statutory damages ) fine to pay back for the financial harm you caused .
Now here 's an nice big extra punishment fine on top so you do n't do it again , and neither does anybody else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages, where each CD they sold would mean them owing $20,000 per song, PER CD.
Instead, it's limited to per song.That's not how statutory damages work.There's three kinds of damages for copyright;1) actual damages.
This is where you work how much has been lost.
So it would be the few cents per song per CD that was sold without permission that was owing on royalties.
The difficulty of this in general though when it comes to copyright infringement is that you often don't know how many copies were distributed.
So you have option 2,2) statutory damages.
This is a 'stand-in' figure for actual damages.
They go - "we only caught bob the market trader with 2 copies of our CD.
But he likely sold lots of copies, which we can't prove directly.
So we'll ask for the statutory damages laid down in law instead".
These are charged once per infringement (not per individual copy), but go from eye-watering to downright extortionate amounts, i.e.
the $20,000 per track claimed for in this case.
Of course, one reason they're so high is because the music industry lobbied for them to be.3) punitive damages.
This is where the court goes - "Ok, here's your (actual damages/statutory damages) fine to pay back for the financial harm you caused.
Now here's an nice big extra punishment fine on top so you don't do it again, and neither does anybody else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359472</id>
	<title>Raise your hand if ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260189780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... you think big corporations, especially investor owned ones, are fundamentally honest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... you think big corporations , especially investor owned ones , are fundamentally honest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... you think big corporations, especially investor owned ones, are fundamentally honest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368286</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>tomtomtom</author>
	<datestamp>1260300840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online. In fact, the most dangerous type (from my EE perspective) is false labelling on electronics, especially circuit breakers and other protective devices. This is an endemic problem and it's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A.</p></div><p>Surely, if the problem was actually copyright infringement, then the device would still work exactly as the original "official" product? The fact that it doesn't suggests either (i) it's a totally different product passed off as something its not, or (ii) it's the same design, but grossly negligent workmanship was applied in its creation.</p><p>The situation you are describing is actually a problem with regulatory compliance (devices not properly tested and certified for sale); the copyright (or trademark, for that matter) infringement is completely incidental to the safety issue. Putting your life on the line on the basis of the brand name of your gear (which I presume you think will give you information like "this product actually does what the law requires it to") is utterly stupid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online .
In fact , the most dangerous type ( from my EE perspective ) is false labelling on electronics , especially circuit breakers and other protective devices .
This is an endemic problem and it 's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A.Surely , if the problem was actually copyright infringement , then the device would still work exactly as the original " official " product ?
The fact that it does n't suggests either ( i ) it 's a totally different product passed off as something its not , or ( ii ) it 's the same design , but grossly negligent workmanship was applied in its creation.The situation you are describing is actually a problem with regulatory compliance ( devices not properly tested and certified for sale ) ; the copyright ( or trademark , for that matter ) infringement is completely incidental to the safety issue .
Putting your life on the line on the basis of the brand name of your gear ( which I presume you think will give you information like " this product actually does what the law requires it to " ) is utterly stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online.
In fact, the most dangerous type (from my EE perspective) is false labelling on electronics, especially circuit breakers and other protective devices.
This is an endemic problem and it's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A.Surely, if the problem was actually copyright infringement, then the device would still work exactly as the original "official" product?
The fact that it doesn't suggests either (i) it's a totally different product passed off as something its not, or (ii) it's the same design, but grossly negligent workmanship was applied in its creation.The situation you are describing is actually a problem with regulatory compliance (devices not properly tested and certified for sale); the copyright (or trademark, for that matter) infringement is completely incidental to the safety issue.
Putting your life on the line on the basis of the brand name of your gear (which I presume you think will give you information like "this product actually does what the law requires it to") is utterly stupid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360126</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>schon</author>
	<datestamp>1260194400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is, and always has been, a violation to provide the copies.</p></div><p>No.  There is no law against "making available", which is why when the CRIA filed a court order to obtain the personal information of alleged filesharing users in 2003, the judge basically said "you haven't shown that any law has been broken."  Bills C60 and C61 both had provisions to add "making available" to Canadian law, but as you mentioned, both of them died on the floor of Parliament.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus, that's legal up until the point when you start seeding.</p></div><p>Again wrong.  If you're using Azureus then you are (by definition) making a copy for your own personal use.  Once you're seeding, it's *other people* who are making the copies.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In short, up here, it's legal to download but unlawful to upload.*</p></div><p>True, but irrelevant in this context, as when using P2P, nobody is actively "uploading" - people download from you (which is not the same thing), but you're not actively making any copies.  The copy you made went into your "downloads" directory, which you (ostensibly) made so you could listen to it.  The additional copies made when other people download from you are legal, as they are (also ostensibly) being made for those people's personal use.   "Making available" isn't illegal, so no laws are being broken.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>That's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media; a "pirate tax", if you will. CIRA has already decided that I'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating, so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue. I am not making that up.</p></div><p>You may be surprised that the <a href="http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#other\_countries" title="neil.eton.ca">US has a similar levy</a> [neil.eton.ca], but it applies to blank "audio" CDs only.  As mentioned in the link, many other countries have a copyright levy too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is , and always has been , a violation to provide the copies.No .
There is no law against " making available " , which is why when the CRIA filed a court order to obtain the personal information of alleged filesharing users in 2003 , the judge basically said " you have n't shown that any law has been broken .
" Bills C60 and C61 both had provisions to add " making available " to Canadian law , but as you mentioned , both of them died on the floor of Parliament.This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus , that 's legal up until the point when you start seeding.Again wrong .
If you 're using Azureus then you are ( by definition ) making a copy for your own personal use .
Once you 're seeding , it 's * other people * who are making the copies.In short , up here , it 's legal to download but unlawful to upload .
* True , but irrelevant in this context , as when using P2P , nobody is actively " uploading " - people download from you ( which is not the same thing ) , but you 're not actively making any copies .
The copy you made went into your " downloads " directory , which you ( ostensibly ) made so you could listen to it .
The additional copies made when other people download from you are legal , as they are ( also ostensibly ) being made for those people 's personal use .
" Making available " is n't illegal , so no laws are being broken.That 's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media ; a " pirate tax " , if you will .
CIRA has already decided that I 'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating , so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue .
I am not making that up.You may be surprised that the US has a similar levy [ neil.eton.ca ] , but it applies to blank " audio " CDs only .
As mentioned in the link , many other countries have a copyright levy too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is, and always has been, a violation to provide the copies.No.
There is no law against "making available", which is why when the CRIA filed a court order to obtain the personal information of alleged filesharing users in 2003, the judge basically said "you haven't shown that any law has been broken.
"  Bills C60 and C61 both had provisions to add "making available" to Canadian law, but as you mentioned, both of them died on the floor of Parliament.This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus, that's legal up until the point when you start seeding.Again wrong.
If you're using Azureus then you are (by definition) making a copy for your own personal use.
Once you're seeding, it's *other people* who are making the copies.In short, up here, it's legal to download but unlawful to upload.
*True, but irrelevant in this context, as when using P2P, nobody is actively "uploading" - people download from you (which is not the same thing), but you're not actively making any copies.
The copy you made went into your "downloads" directory, which you (ostensibly) made so you could listen to it.
The additional copies made when other people download from you are legal, as they are (also ostensibly) being made for those people's personal use.
"Making available" isn't illegal, so no laws are being broken.That's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media; a "pirate tax", if you will.
CIRA has already decided that I'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating, so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue.
I am not making that up.You may be surprised that the US has a similar levy [neil.eton.ca], but it applies to blank "audio" CDs only.
As mentioned in the link, many other countries have a copyright levy too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369658</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1260263400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will be happy to see how this one turns out, in case I get caught downloading,<br>I might need to know what their defense is, and how to apply it in court.<br>: )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will be happy to see how this one turns out , in case I get caught downloading,I might need to know what their defense is , and how to apply it in court .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will be happy to see how this one turns out, in case I get caught downloading,I might need to know what their defense is, and how to apply it in court.
: )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359502</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1260189960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial\_estoppel" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial\_estoppel</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Seeing as how it was based on common law it may trace its ancestry back to Britain and might well be relevent in Canada, seeing as it's part of the empire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial \ _estoppel [ wikipedia.org ] Seeing as how it was based on common law it may trace its ancestry back to Britain and might well be relevent in Canada , seeing as it 's part of the empire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial\_estoppel [wikipedia.org]Seeing as how it was based on common law it may trace its ancestry back to Britain and might well be relevent in Canada, seeing as it's part of the empire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359272</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA. They simply can't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision. If they 'win' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose, well, they lose big!</i></p><p>Actually, it's even worse, since this infringement is commercial infringement, which means your business is infringing copyright to make money. Which is very different from non-commercial infringement for personal use only.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA .
They simply ca n't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision .
If they 'win ' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose , well , they lose big ! Actually , it 's even worse , since this infringement is commercial infringement , which means your business is infringing copyright to make money .
Which is very different from non-commercial infringement for personal use only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This will be settled ASAP by CRIA.
They simply can't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision.
If they 'win' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose, well, they lose big!Actually, it's even worse, since this infringement is commercial infringement, which means your business is infringing copyright to make money.
Which is very different from non-commercial infringement for personal use only.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363156</id>
	<title>Re:As a Canadian, ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260268740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that exactly what NAFTA, ACTA, TRIPs, WTO etc. are meant to do? Harmonization between rules in Canada and the rest of the world including U.S.A?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that exactly what NAFTA , ACTA , TRIPs , WTO etc .
are meant to do ?
Harmonization between rules in Canada and the rest of the world including U.S.A ?
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that exactly what NAFTA, ACTA, TRIPs, WTO etc.
are meant to do?
Harmonization between rules in Canada and the rest of the world including U.S.A?
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359108</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359516</id>
	<title>Re:justification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260190020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why I have a broadcasting licence.</p><p>I just have to have 35\% Canadian content on all mix tapes, MP3 collections, and playlists in accordance with CRTC regulations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why I have a broadcasting licence.I just have to have 35 \ % Canadian content on all mix tapes , MP3 collections , and playlists in accordance with CRTC regulations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why I have a broadcasting licence.I just have to have 35\% Canadian content on all mix tapes, MP3 collections, and playlists in accordance with CRTC regulations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360116</id>
	<title>Re:justification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260194280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow. That would be just awful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow .
That would be just awful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow.
That would be just awful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360304</id>
	<title>Ahhhhh</title>
	<author>Stumbles</author>
	<datestamp>1260196020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The goose and gander finally meet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The goose and gander finally meet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The goose and gander finally meet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359550</id>
	<title>A little more than Disney</title>
	<author>Oxford\_Comma\_Lover</author>
	<datestamp>1260190320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To put this in context, 60 Billion is just over the market capitalization for Disney.

So the claim is that the infringers... should have to give the producers... a little more than Disney.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To put this in context , 60 Billion is just over the market capitalization for Disney .
So the claim is that the infringers... should have to give the producers... a little more than Disney .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To put this in context, 60 Billion is just over the market capitalization for Disney.
So the claim is that the infringers... should have to give the producers... a little more than Disney.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360700</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>ravenshrike</author>
	<datestamp>1260198840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are we talking about the same 'little people' who immediately sold off their shares to pay for their pensions?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we talking about the same 'little people ' who immediately sold off their shares to pay for their pensions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we talking about the same 'little people' who immediately sold off their shares to pay for their pensions?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360488</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Psaakyrn</author>
	<datestamp>1260197340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And then you get int an "Animal Farm" situation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And then you get int an " Animal Farm " situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then you get int an "Animal Farm" situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360118</id>
	<title>is this really a copyright issue</title>
	<author>whoever57</author>
	<datestamp>1260194280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>most of the copyrights are owned by the labels rather than the artists, and they are unlikely to press charges against each other. what this is really about is royalties that should have been paid to the artists for the use of the works [created by the artists but now owned by the labels] -- in other words contract violations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>most of the copyrights are owned by the labels rather than the artists , and they are unlikely to press charges against each other .
what this is really about is royalties that should have been paid to the artists for the use of the works [ created by the artists but now owned by the labels ] -- in other words contract violations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>most of the copyrights are owned by the labels rather than the artists, and they are unlikely to press charges against each other.
what this is really about is royalties that should have been paid to the artists for the use of the works [created by the artists but now owned by the labels] -- in other words contract violations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359818</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260192060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welding is not unskilled labor. Get GM's dick out of your mouth and say something useful, or keep on suckin' until you get your cumuppance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welding is not unskilled labor .
Get GM 's dick out of your mouth and say something useful , or keep on suckin ' until you get your cumuppance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welding is not unskilled labor.
Get GM's dick out of your mouth and say something useful, or keep on suckin' until you get your cumuppance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359680</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1260191160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's like Microsoft and software patents: they'll find a way to bullshit their way through with their self-contradictory needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like Microsoft and software patents : they 'll find a way to bullshit their way through with their self-contradictory needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like Microsoft and software patents: they'll find a way to bullshit their way through with their self-contradictory needs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359108</id>
	<title>As a Canadian, ...</title>
	<author>Looce</author>
	<datestamp>1260187860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and as someone who doesn't really trust companies that much, let me just say that, if the CRIA gets fined for willful infringement, I hope that <b>this</b> is the precedent that ends up being applied to the United States, not the reverse.</p><p>Now the recording industry's argument is going to be less and less well-received by the general population, and this can only be a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and as someone who does n't really trust companies that much , let me just say that , if the CRIA gets fined for willful infringement , I hope that this is the precedent that ends up being applied to the United States , not the reverse.Now the recording industry 's argument is going to be less and less well-received by the general population , and this can only be a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and as someone who doesn't really trust companies that much, let me just say that, if the CRIA gets fined for willful infringement, I hope that this is the precedent that ends up being applied to the United States, not the reverse.Now the recording industry's argument is going to be less and less well-received by the general population, and this can only be a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359118</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations can't go to jail. Corporations can't willfully infringe either, because they have no will of their own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations ca n't go to jail .
Corporations ca n't willfully infringe either , because they have no will of their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations can't go to jail.
Corporations can't willfully infringe either, because they have no will of their own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30366126</id>
	<title>Re:I would like to point out:</title>
	<author>ais523</author>
	<datestamp>1260291600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, let me get this straight, those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet, what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address, who may have moved a few times, etc.. and the CRIA can't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they haven't allocated enough resources?</p></div><p>Of course. It is in fact very easy to allocate resources insufficient to find Bruce Springstein. Cheaper than allocating resources that are sufficient, too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , let me get this straight , those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet , what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address , who may have moved a few times , etc.. and the CRIA ca n't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they have n't allocated enough resources ? Of course .
It is in fact very easy to allocate resources insufficient to find Bruce Springstein .
Cheaper than allocating resources that are sufficient , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, let me get this straight, those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet, what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address, who may have moved a few times, etc.. and the CRIA can't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they haven't allocated enough resources?Of course.
It is in fact very easy to allocate resources insufficient to find Bruce Springstein.
Cheaper than allocating resources that are sufficient, too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359734</id>
	<title>Re:Like GM?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260191580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you think welding is "unskilled", you haven't done much of it. Welding is a trade, like plumbing or carpentry, that takes years to master, and $20 seems pretty fair (possibly even on the low end) for compensation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think welding is " unskilled " , you have n't done much of it .
Welding is a trade , like plumbing or carpentry , that takes years to master , and $ 20 seems pretty fair ( possibly even on the low end ) for compensation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think welding is "unskilled", you haven't done much of it.
Welding is a trade, like plumbing or carpentry, that takes years to master, and $20 seems pretty fair (possibly even on the low end) for compensation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361720</id>
	<title>We need to get rid of money.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260207360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist."</p><p>So in other words the purpose of sharing is to deny the big media profit? Now why didn't Joel Tenenbaum try that argument?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist .
" So in other words the purpose of sharing is to deny the big media profit ?
Now why did n't Joel Tenenbaum try that argument ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"People might buy more and share less if they knew that more of the money went to the artist.
"So in other words the purpose of sharing is to deny the big media profit?
Now why didn't Joel Tenenbaum try that argument?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359434</id>
	<title>This isn't irony...</title>
	<author>bennomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1260189540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's what copyright law was intended for.  It's not Joe Schmoe making a mix CD for his best friends that's a problem.  It's not even the guy who allows 10,000 people who weren't going to buy an album anyway to download it from his server.  The problem is people and organizations who make a career out of profiting from other people's work.
<br> <br>
The RIAA, CRIA and the MPAA are effectively no better than pimps.  It's good that the law is finally being applied as it should.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's what copyright law was intended for .
It 's not Joe Schmoe making a mix CD for his best friends that 's a problem .
It 's not even the guy who allows 10,000 people who were n't going to buy an album anyway to download it from his server .
The problem is people and organizations who make a career out of profiting from other people 's work .
The RIAA , CRIA and the MPAA are effectively no better than pimps .
It 's good that the law is finally being applied as it should .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's what copyright law was intended for.
It's not Joe Schmoe making a mix CD for his best friends that's a problem.
It's not even the guy who allows 10,000 people who weren't going to buy an album anyway to download it from his server.
The problem is people and organizations who make a career out of profiting from other people's work.
The RIAA, CRIA and the MPAA are effectively no better than pimps.
It's good that the law is finally being applied as it should.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360580</id>
	<title>Oblig.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260198000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey America!</p><p>In Democratic Canada, we sue our CRIA and let DMCA-type bills die on our parlimentary floor!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey America ! In Democratic Canada , we sue our CRIA and let DMCA-type bills die on our parlimentary floor !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey America!In Democratic Canada, we sue our CRIA and let DMCA-type bills die on our parlimentary floor!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359130</id>
	<title>Whoever funds those companies...</title>
	<author>ForAllTheFish</author>
	<datestamp>1260187920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... must be really bad at math, or they would have been a little nervous about the line on the balance sheet that reads: Total Liabilities: $6,000,000,000</htmltext>
<tokenext>... must be really bad at math , or they would have been a little nervous about the line on the balance sheet that reads : Total Liabilities : $ 6,000,000,000</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... must be really bad at math, or they would have been a little nervous about the line on the balance sheet that reads: Total Liabilities: $6,000,000,000</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360124</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260194340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually DVD's don't have that tax,</p><p>Hence why you got o the store and blank DVD's are cheaper than blank CD's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually DVD 's do n't have that tax,Hence why you got o the store and blank DVD 's are cheaper than blank CD 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually DVD's don't have that tax,Hence why you got o the store and blank DVD's are cheaper than blank CD's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738</id>
	<title>CRIA? same as RIAA: they're WESU !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260191580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise, a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA, and suggested that we actually refer to them by name: <strong>W</strong>arner, <strong>E</strong>MI, <strong>S</strong>ony, and <strong>U</strong>niversal.  Together they form the acronym WESU, as in "We sue!  Yes, we do!"</p><p>Now this CRIA organization is suing.  Hmm... let's see who the big members are.  From TFA:<br>"The defendants in the case are <strong>W</strong>arner Music Canada, <strong>E</strong>MI Music Canada, <strong>S</strong>ony BMG Music Canada, and <strong>U</strong>niversal Music Canada, the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association."</p><p>Sound familiar????  Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as <strong>WESU</strong>!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise , a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA , and suggested that we actually refer to them by name : Warner , EMI , Sony , and Universal .
Together they form the acronym WESU , as in " We sue !
Yes , we do !
" Now this CRIA organization is suing .
Hmm... let 's see who the big members are .
From TFA : " The defendants in the case are Warner Music Canada , EMI Music Canada , Sony BMG Music Canada , and Universal Music Canada , the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association .
" Sound familiar ? ? ? ?
Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise, a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA, and suggested that we actually refer to them by name: Warner, EMI, Sony, and Universal.
Together they form the acronym WESU, as in "We sue!
Yes, we do!
"Now this CRIA organization is suing.
Hmm... let's see who the big members are.
From TFA:"The defendants in the case are Warner Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada, the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association.
"Sound familiar????
Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369300</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260305040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You want irony? The companies want the same rights as people, let them be treated as people. The company perpetrates a criminal act, the <b>company</b> goes to jail -- all business operations are required to cease for the duration of the sentence, all assets are frozen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You want irony ?
The companies want the same rights as people , let them be treated as people .
The company perpetrates a criminal act , the company goes to jail -- all business operations are required to cease for the duration of the sentence , all assets are frozen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want irony?
The companies want the same rights as people, let them be treated as people.
The company perpetrates a criminal act, the company goes to jail -- all business operations are required to cease for the duration of the sentence, all assets are frozen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1260188520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's also remember this is Canada, and so far as I'm aware, there has been no infringement case where the value per song has been pegged.  While rulings from other jurisdictions may, to one degree or another, inform a ruling, US precedent has no bearing.  It's quite feasible that if this were to go to trial, the judge might decide each infringement is only $1000 or $10.  Since this particular situation seems restricted to record company actions in Canada, and doesn't happen in the US, it's difficult to see how the complainants can possibly hope to maintain the value per song that they're asking for.</p><p>I think CRIA will settle ASAP, but mainly to assure that there is no low-ball price per song is put on the books.  Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards.  When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers, the precedent is already there that each song is only worth, say, $1 per infraction.  It would pretty much wipe out any chance of fear and extortion even for those found guilty of illegal file sharing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's also remember this is Canada , and so far as I 'm aware , there has been no infringement case where the value per song has been pegged .
While rulings from other jurisdictions may , to one degree or another , inform a ruling , US precedent has no bearing .
It 's quite feasible that if this were to go to trial , the judge might decide each infringement is only $ 1000 or $ 10 .
Since this particular situation seems restricted to record company actions in Canada , and does n't happen in the US , it 's difficult to see how the complainants can possibly hope to maintain the value per song that they 're asking for.I think CRIA will settle ASAP , but mainly to assure that there is no low-ball price per song is put on the books .
Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards .
When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers , the precedent is already there that each song is only worth , say , $ 1 per infraction .
It would pretty much wipe out any chance of fear and extortion even for those found guilty of illegal file sharing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's also remember this is Canada, and so far as I'm aware, there has been no infringement case where the value per song has been pegged.
While rulings from other jurisdictions may, to one degree or another, inform a ruling, US precedent has no bearing.
It's quite feasible that if this were to go to trial, the judge might decide each infringement is only $1000 or $10.
Since this particular situation seems restricted to record company actions in Canada, and doesn't happen in the US, it's difficult to see how the complainants can possibly hope to maintain the value per song that they're asking for.I think CRIA will settle ASAP, but mainly to assure that there is no low-ball price per song is put on the books.
Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards.
When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers, the precedent is already there that each song is only worth, say, $1 per infraction.
It would pretty much wipe out any chance of fear and extortion even for those found guilty of illegal file sharing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>canajin56</author>
	<datestamp>1260189660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except that we do have statutory damages for willful copyright infringement.  They admit they knew they didn't have the rights, and that they made $50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to.  In fact, this is a class action, over the fact that they have used a total of THREE MILLION SONGS WITHOUT PERMISSION.  The law is clear, $20,000 per instance of copyright infringement.  You're right, the Canadian courts haven't tested the legal principal that copyright infringement laws really mean per copy, not per copyrighted song that you misappropriate.  If Canadian courts HAD approved such an absurd notion, then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages, where each CD they sold would mean them owing $20,000 per song, PER CD.  Instead, it's limited to per song.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that we do have statutory damages for willful copyright infringement .
They admit they knew they did n't have the rights , and that they made $ 50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to .
In fact , this is a class action , over the fact that they have used a total of THREE MILLION SONGS WITHOUT PERMISSION .
The law is clear , $ 20,000 per instance of copyright infringement .
You 're right , the Canadian courts have n't tested the legal principal that copyright infringement laws really mean per copy , not per copyrighted song that you misappropriate .
If Canadian courts HAD approved such an absurd notion , then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages , where each CD they sold would mean them owing $ 20,000 per song , PER CD .
Instead , it 's limited to per song .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that we do have statutory damages for willful copyright infringement.
They admit they knew they didn't have the rights, and that they made $50 million off selling things they were fully aware they had zero rights to.
In fact, this is a class action, over the fact that they have used a total of THREE MILLION SONGS WITHOUT PERMISSION.
The law is clear, $20,000 per instance of copyright infringement.
You're right, the Canadian courts haven't tested the legal principal that copyright infringement laws really mean per copy, not per copyrighted song that you misappropriate.
If Canadian courts HAD approved such an absurd notion, then the CRIA members would be faction quadrillions in damages, where each CD they sold would mean them owing $20,000 per song, PER CD.
Instead, it's limited to per song.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360314</id>
	<title>Re:justification</title>
	<author>Jaysyn</author>
	<datestamp>1260196080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Treaties &amp; Conventions?  Seizure of other assets (think child companies).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Treaties &amp; Conventions ?
Seizure of other assets ( think child companies ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Treaties &amp; Conventions?
Seizure of other assets (think child companies).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1260189300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me.  They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place.  And here's the kicker -- it's not casual copying or sharing -- it's massive for-profit piracy.  There should be criminal charges filed, prison time served and a massive reorganization of the companies charged.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me .
They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place .
And here 's the kicker -- it 's not casual copying or sharing -- it 's massive for-profit piracy .
There should be criminal charges filed , prison time served and a massive reorganization of the companies charged .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is shocking and awe inspiring to me.
They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place.
And here's the kicker -- it's not casual copying or sharing -- it's massive for-profit piracy.
There should be criminal charges filed, prison time served and a massive reorganization of the companies charged.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361444</id>
	<title>Re:CRIA will never get nailed for this</title>
	<author>LeperPuppet</author>
	<datestamp>1260204900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the CRIA are convicted and fined the full amount, we'll finally find out whether it's possible to overdose on Schadenfreude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the CRIA are convicted and fined the full amount , we 'll finally find out whether it 's possible to overdose on Schadenfreude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the CRIA are convicted and fined the full amount, we'll finally find out whether it's possible to overdose on Schadenfreude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359372</id>
	<title>I would like to point out:</title>
	<author>NoYob</author>
	<datestamp>1260189240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>notes in his affidavit that "the record labels have devoted insufficient resources for identifying and paying the owners of musical works on the pending lists." The CRIA members now face the prospect of far greater liability.</p></div><p>I'm assuming that the CRIA is basically the Canadian branch of the RIAA, or at least affiliated with it?</p><p>So, let me get this straight, those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet, what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address, who may have moved a few times, etc.. and the CRIA can't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they haven't allocated enough resources?</p><p>Riiiiiiigggght.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>notes in his affidavit that " the record labels have devoted insufficient resources for identifying and paying the owners of musical works on the pending lists .
" The CRIA members now face the prospect of far greater liability.I 'm assuming that the CRIA is basically the Canadian branch of the RIAA , or at least affiliated with it ? So , let me get this straight , those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet , what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address , who may have moved a few times , etc.. and the CRIA ca n't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they have n't allocated enough resources ? Riiiiiiigggght .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>notes in his affidavit that "the record labels have devoted insufficient resources for identifying and paying the owners of musical works on the pending lists.
" The CRIA members now face the prospect of far greater liability.I'm assuming that the CRIA is basically the Canadian branch of the RIAA, or at least affiliated with it?So, let me get this straight, those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet, what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address, who may have moved a few times, etc.. and the CRIA can't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they haven't allocated enough resources?Riiiiiiigggght.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360504</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260197400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You appear to be confused and/or uptight. If both cases, perhaps you should stay off a site where everyone thinks they are a comedian. If the former then this should help:</p><p>joke</p><p>n.<br>1. Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.<br>2. A mischievous trick; a prank.<br>3. An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.<br>4. Informal<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; a. Something not to be taken seriously; a triviality: The accident was no joke.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; b. An object of amusement or laughter; a laughingstock: His loud tie was the joke of the office.</p><p>v. joked, joking, jokes<br>1. To tell or play jokes; jest.<br>2. To speak in fun; be facetious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You appear to be confused and/or uptight .
If both cases , perhaps you should stay off a site where everyone thinks they are a comedian .
If the former then this should help : joken.1 .
Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement , especially an amusing story with a punch line.2 .
A mischievous trick ; a prank.3 .
An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.4 .
Informal     a. Something not to be taken seriously ; a triviality : The accident was no joke .
    b. An object of amusement or laughter ; a laughingstock : His loud tie was the joke of the office.v .
joked , joking , jokes1 .
To tell or play jokes ; jest.2 .
To speak in fun ; be facetious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You appear to be confused and/or uptight.
If both cases, perhaps you should stay off a site where everyone thinks they are a comedian.
If the former then this should help:joken.1.
Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.2.
A mischievous trick; a prank.3.
An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.4.
Informal
    a. Something not to be taken seriously; a triviality: The accident was no joke.
    b. An object of amusement or laughter; a laughingstock: His loud tie was the joke of the office.v.
joked, joking, jokes1.
To tell or play jokes; jest.2.
To speak in fun; be facetious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30367570</id>
	<title>Re:One unanswered question?</title>
	<author>swordgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1260298080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they've only now hit the end of their rope, so to speak. They've spent decades trying to work with the CRIA, but with either false or no progress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they 've only now hit the end of their rope , so to speak .
They 've spent decades trying to work with the CRIA , but with either false or no progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they've only now hit the end of their rope, so to speak.
They've spent decades trying to work with the CRIA, but with either false or no progress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644</id>
	<title>One unanswered question?</title>
	<author>One\_Minute\_Too\_Late</author>
	<datestamp>1260190920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this has been going on since the late 80s, why did it take so long to file the class action lawsuit?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this has been going on since the late 80s , why did it take so long to file the class action lawsuit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this has been going on since the late 80s, why did it take so long to file the class action lawsuit?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359326</id>
	<title>wouldn't it be nice..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck, they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward, Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada. But I doubt it.</p><p>(no offense Americans.. unless you're one of the cronies who created the DMCA)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck , they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward , Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada .
But I doubt it .
( no offense Americans.. unless you 're one of the cronies who created the DMCA )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CRIA is a mini-me of the RIAA and with any luck, they will be sued out of existence before they bring a backward, Draconian &amp; American DMCA to Canada.
But I doubt it.
(no offense Americans.. unless you're one of the cronies who created the DMCA)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492</id>
	<title>Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour</title>
	<author>Beardo the Bearded</author>
	<datestamp>1260189900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Canada, it's still not a violation of copyright law to copy something for personal use. The last two attempts to change the law (Bills C-60 and C-61) were put aside during the last few elections.</p><p>It is, and always has been, a violation to provide the copies. This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus, that's legal up until the point when you start seeding. (Which is, of course, before you're done downloading, but that's a matter for the philosophers.) In short, up here, it's legal to download but unlawful to upload.* That's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media; a "pirate tax", if you will. CIRA has already decided that I'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating, so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue. I am not making that up.</p><p>Now, the <b>proposed</b> penalties for uploading under C-61 were $20k per offence. It was $500 for downloading, or $20k if you broke any encoding whatsoever. These values were <i>going to be put into Canadian law</i> but were fortunately stopped by government instability. (That's a much longer story than<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. has time for.)</p><p>Canadian law does not require our judges to use previous cases as a stepping point for punitive damages; you won't see a billion-dollar fine put up simply because you have to have a rationale for the punishment.</p><p>Our courts are also loser-pay, which is why you can't just drop a lawsuit or you admit you've lost and will have to pay the costs. If they were to sue, say, me, I would refer them to my lawyer. They know that I've got one, and that that first call is likely to cost them the $200 once the dust settles. (I would call her in the meantime and tell her to have No Mercy.) You won't get scare-tactic suits up here like you have in the states.</p><p>* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online. In fact, the most dangerous type (from my EE perspective) is false labelling on electronics, especially circuit breakers and other protective devices. This is an endemic problem and it's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Canada , it 's still not a violation of copyright law to copy something for personal use .
The last two attempts to change the law ( Bills C-60 and C-61 ) were put aside during the last few elections.It is , and always has been , a violation to provide the copies .
This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus , that 's legal up until the point when you start seeding .
( Which is , of course , before you 're done downloading , but that 's a matter for the philosophers .
) In short , up here , it 's legal to download but unlawful to upload .
* That 's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media ; a " pirate tax " , if you will .
CIRA has already decided that I 'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating , so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue .
I am not making that up.Now , the proposed penalties for uploading under C-61 were $ 20k per offence .
It was $ 500 for downloading , or $ 20k if you broke any encoding whatsoever .
These values were going to be put into Canadian law but were fortunately stopped by government instability .
( That 's a much longer story than / .
has time for .
) Canadian law does not require our judges to use previous cases as a stepping point for punitive damages ; you wo n't see a billion-dollar fine put up simply because you have to have a rationale for the punishment.Our courts are also loser-pay , which is why you ca n't just drop a lawsuit or you admit you 've lost and will have to pay the costs .
If they were to sue , say , me , I would refer them to my lawyer .
They know that I 've got one , and that that first call is likely to cost them the $ 200 once the dust settles .
( I would call her in the meantime and tell her to have No Mercy .
) You wo n't get scare-tactic suits up here like you have in the states .
* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online .
In fact , the most dangerous type ( from my EE perspective ) is false labelling on electronics , especially circuit breakers and other protective devices .
This is an endemic problem and it 's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Canada, it's still not a violation of copyright law to copy something for personal use.
The last two attempts to change the law (Bills C-60 and C-61) were put aside during the last few elections.It is, and always has been, a violation to provide the copies.
This provides the interesting point where if someone downloads an album via Azureus, that's legal up until the point when you start seeding.
(Which is, of course, before you're done downloading, but that's a matter for the philosophers.
) In short, up here, it's legal to download but unlawful to upload.
* That's because we pay a CIRA levy on all blank media; a "pirate tax", if you will.
CIRA has already decided that I'm going to use that spindle of DVD-Rs for pirating, so I should pay a little extra at the counter to compensate them for the loss of revenue.
I am not making that up.Now, the proposed penalties for uploading under C-61 were $20k per offence.
It was $500 for downloading, or $20k if you broke any encoding whatsoever.
These values were going to be put into Canadian law but were fortunately stopped by government instability.
(That's a much longer story than /.
has time for.
)Canadian law does not require our judges to use previous cases as a stepping point for punitive damages; you won't see a billion-dollar fine put up simply because you have to have a rationale for the punishment.Our courts are also loser-pay, which is why you can't just drop a lawsuit or you admit you've lost and will have to pay the costs.
If they were to sue, say, me, I would refer them to my lawyer.
They know that I've got one, and that that first call is likely to cost them the $200 once the dust settles.
(I would call her in the meantime and tell her to have No Mercy.
) You won't get scare-tactic suits up here like you have in the states.
* I know that not all copyright infringement is music-sharing online.
In fact, the most dangerous type (from my EE perspective) is false labelling on electronics, especially circuit breakers and other protective devices.
This is an endemic problem and it's scary as fuck when a 200A breaker keeps going and melts into fucking slag at 400A.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359432</id>
	<title>Haha</title>
	<author>Turzyx</author>
	<datestamp>1260189540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>.... I think that sums up my thoughts quite nicely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>.... I think that sums up my thoughts quite nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.... I think that sums up my thoughts quite nicely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369472</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>BoberFett</author>
	<datestamp>1260305820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Minnesota Nice is actually Minnesota Gullible. It's just looks like Minnesotans being nice when really most of the people here are just smiling at the person talking because they don't understand what was just said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Minnesota Nice is actually Minnesota Gullible .
It 's just looks like Minnesotans being nice when really most of the people here are just smiling at the person talking because they do n't understand what was just said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Minnesota Nice is actually Minnesota Gullible.
It's just looks like Minnesotans being nice when really most of the people here are just smiling at the person talking because they don't understand what was just said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360918</id>
	<title>Re:CRIA will never get nailed for this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260200520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke (and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him. I am ashamed my country could possibly do so), and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour."</p><p>No No  Phrogman  you have it rather sideways. It was the Liberals that got caught in bed paying off their company friends with big contracts with no work required to get a huge cheque. Actually not even a contract, as they just sent out cheques to their friends. It was the NDP's Bob Ray (Buffalo Bob) that drove/taxed companies out of Canada to Buffalo NY in less than 1 term in office. Who by the way has now turned magically into a Liberal. Who is still hoping to be  Prime Minister once they toss Iggy next spring and then force an election. Forget the NDP or the Green's they don't stand a chance and if you think they do, then you need serious therapy or just a rock to the head. So Phrogman let's be more realistic and sane here. This is what Bob will do.</p><p>With the Liberals in power and involved, there will be 'Puking' involved alright. All Canadians will toss lunch if they vote for that mess and discover that Buffalo Bob does make a deal with the music industry. First he watches the case go to court and the music industry lose big time. They go chapter 11 as expected by the billions they get in fines and restitution. Then the Liberals will of course step in with a 'no need to ever pay it back' or even account for the money, loan. They will simply put a tax on all Canadians to bail out the music industry, That my friend is how the Liberals will save the music industry and all Canadian will be barfing up their lunch, not just you. The music industry will raise prices of music to get their profits back to normal because Canadians won't be able to afford to buy music, even on itunes. End of story. Well not quite. Liberals or Conservatives, it really doesn't matter. The truth is that the losers will be the Canadian people once again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I do n't trust Harper 's government further than I can puke ( and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him .
I am ashamed my country could possibly do so ) , and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour .
" No No Phrogman you have it rather sideways .
It was the Liberals that got caught in bed paying off their company friends with big contracts with no work required to get a huge cheque .
Actually not even a contract , as they just sent out cheques to their friends .
It was the NDP 's Bob Ray ( Buffalo Bob ) that drove/taxed companies out of Canada to Buffalo NY in less than 1 term in office .
Who by the way has now turned magically into a Liberal .
Who is still hoping to be Prime Minister once they toss Iggy next spring and then force an election .
Forget the NDP or the Green 's they do n't stand a chance and if you think they do , then you need serious therapy or just a rock to the head .
So Phrogman let 's be more realistic and sane here .
This is what Bob will do.With the Liberals in power and involved , there will be 'Puking ' involved alright .
All Canadians will toss lunch if they vote for that mess and discover that Buffalo Bob does make a deal with the music industry .
First he watches the case go to court and the music industry lose big time .
They go chapter 11 as expected by the billions they get in fines and restitution .
Then the Liberals will of course step in with a 'no need to ever pay it back ' or even account for the money , loan .
They will simply put a tax on all Canadians to bail out the music industry , That my friend is how the Liberals will save the music industry and all Canadian will be barfing up their lunch , not just you .
The music industry will raise prices of music to get their profits back to normal because Canadians wo n't be able to afford to buy music , even on itunes .
End of story .
Well not quite .
Liberals or Conservatives , it really does n't matter .
The truth is that the losers will be the Canadian people once again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke (and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him.
I am ashamed my country could possibly do so), and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour.
"No No  Phrogman  you have it rather sideways.
It was the Liberals that got caught in bed paying off their company friends with big contracts with no work required to get a huge cheque.
Actually not even a contract, as they just sent out cheques to their friends.
It was the NDP's Bob Ray (Buffalo Bob) that drove/taxed companies out of Canada to Buffalo NY in less than 1 term in office.
Who by the way has now turned magically into a Liberal.
Who is still hoping to be  Prime Minister once they toss Iggy next spring and then force an election.
Forget the NDP or the Green's they don't stand a chance and if you think they do, then you need serious therapy or just a rock to the head.
So Phrogman let's be more realistic and sane here.
This is what Bob will do.With the Liberals in power and involved, there will be 'Puking' involved alright.
All Canadians will toss lunch if they vote for that mess and discover that Buffalo Bob does make a deal with the music industry.
First he watches the case go to court and the music industry lose big time.
They go chapter 11 as expected by the billions they get in fines and restitution.
Then the Liberals will of course step in with a 'no need to ever pay it back' or even account for the money, loan.
They will simply put a tax on all Canadians to bail out the music industry, That my friend is how the Liberals will save the music industry and all Canadian will be barfing up their lunch, not just you.
The music industry will raise prices of music to get their profits back to normal because Canadians won't be able to afford to buy music, even on itunes.
End of story.
Well not quite.
Liberals or Conservatives, it really doesn't matter.
The truth is that the losers will be the Canadian people once again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368386</id>
	<title>Government</title>
	<author>alexo</author>
	<datestamp>1260301200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke</p></div></blockquote><p>Apparently, about <a href="http://www.chacha.com/question/what-is-the-record-for-longest-distance-of-projectile-vomiting" title="chacha.com">9m</a> [chacha.com].</p><p>Joking aside, I have no love for Harper but if there is anything that I've learnt from the US Bush/Obama fiasco, Ignatieff's government will be just as revolting, possibly <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael\_Ignatieff#The\_Lesser\_Evil\_approach" title="wikipedia.org">more so</a> [wikipedia.org].<br>However, I'm afraid that will <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/11/25/ekos-poll025.html" title="www.cbc.ca">remain academic</a> [www.cbc.ca].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't trust Harper 's government further than I can pukeApparently , about 9m [ chacha.com ] .Joking aside , I have no love for Harper but if there is anything that I 've learnt from the US Bush/Obama fiasco , Ignatieff 's government will be just as revolting , possibly more so [ wikipedia.org ] .However , I 'm afraid that will remain academic [ www.cbc.ca ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't trust Harper's government further than I can pukeApparently, about 9m [chacha.com].Joking aside, I have no love for Harper but if there is anything that I've learnt from the US Bush/Obama fiasco, Ignatieff's government will be just as revolting, possibly more so [wikipedia.org].However, I'm afraid that will remain academic [www.cbc.ca].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260189240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you.</p> </div><p>It's Minnesotan, not canadian. You know, as in "Minnesota nice". Now <i>please</i> go f*ck yourself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you .
It 's Minnesotan , not canadian .
You know , as in " Minnesota nice " .
Now please go f * ck yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Canadian accent makes it hard for me to understand you.
It's Minnesotan, not canadian.
You know, as in "Minnesota nice".
Now please go f*ck yourself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359282</id>
	<title>Re:my bet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260188580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They'll put it on their "Fines Pending" list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'll put it on their " Fines Pending " list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'll put it on their "Fines Pending" list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834</id>
	<title>Re:Irony</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260192180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My friend says "Minnesota nice" really means "Minnesota nice to your face" (while putting a knife in your back).</p><p>Is that true, eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My friend says " Minnesota nice " really means " Minnesota nice to your face " ( while putting a knife in your back ) .Is that true , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My friend says "Minnesota nice" really means "Minnesota nice to your face" (while putting a knife in your back).Is that true, eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359348</id>
	<title>Poetic justice</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1260189000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although I'm sure they'll get out of it one way or another.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I 'm sure they 'll get out of it one way or another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I'm sure they'll get out of it one way or another.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30366126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30372016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30367570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1917245_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359516
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30365294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30366126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30367570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359550
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361420
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359610
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360078
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359818
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359492
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368286
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362256
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360126
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360516
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359460
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30372016
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359056
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30368386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359240
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359380
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359834
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369472
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369492
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359738
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30363506
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362354
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359396
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30362666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30360986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359130
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361720
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30361800
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359150
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1917245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30359326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1917245.30369142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
