<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_13_2254218</id>
	<title>Hollywood Sets $10 Billion Box Office Record</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1260707700000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>kamikazearun sends in a TorrentFreak analysis that begins <i>"Claims by the MPAA that illegal downloads are killing the industry and causing billions in losses are once again being shredded. In 2009, the leading Hollywood studios <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/damned-pirates-hollywood-sets-10-billion-box-office-record-091211/">made more films and generated more revenue than ever before</a>, and for the first time in history the domestic box office grosses will surpass $10 billion. ... [N]either the ever-increasing piracy rates nor the global recession could prevent Hollywood having its best year ever in 2009. With an estimated $10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office, the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>kamikazearun sends in a TorrentFreak analysis that begins " Claims by the MPAA that illegal downloads are killing the industry and causing billions in losses are once again being shredded .
In 2009 , the leading Hollywood studios made more films and generated more revenue than ever before , and for the first time in history the domestic box office grosses will surpass $ 10 billion .
... [ N ] either the ever-increasing piracy rates nor the global recession could prevent Hollywood having its best year ever in 2009 .
With an estimated $ 10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office , the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>kamikazearun sends in a TorrentFreak analysis that begins "Claims by the MPAA that illegal downloads are killing the industry and causing billions in losses are once again being shredded.
In 2009, the leading Hollywood studios made more films and generated more revenue than ever before, and for the first time in history the domestic box office grosses will surpass $10 billion.
... [N]either the ever-increasing piracy rates nor the global recession could prevent Hollywood having its best year ever in 2009.
With an estimated $10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office, the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</id>
	<title>Going to the movies is different than buying one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260712260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience. Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience .
Although the impact is far less than they claim , I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience.
Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592</id>
	<title>Hollywood Traditionally Does Well In Recessions</title>
	<author>The0retical</author>
	<datestamp>1260711960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was an article a while back (no I can't find it with the 2 minutes of searching I did) where a magazine compared the ticket sales of economic recessions during the 90's and early 2000's. The summation of the article was that even with major blockbuster films, like Starwars ep 1, Hollywood made less money than the year before because times were good and people were doing things besides going to the movies, but in economic downturns they actually made more money. The theory was that audiences will attend movies to distract them from all the problems that they have instead of stewing in them.</p><p>I'll post it if I can find it but the laziness is running deep tonight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was an article a while back ( no I ca n't find it with the 2 minutes of searching I did ) where a magazine compared the ticket sales of economic recessions during the 90 's and early 2000 's .
The summation of the article was that even with major blockbuster films , like Starwars ep 1 , Hollywood made less money than the year before because times were good and people were doing things besides going to the movies , but in economic downturns they actually made more money .
The theory was that audiences will attend movies to distract them from all the problems that they have instead of stewing in them.I 'll post it if I can find it but the laziness is running deep tonight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was an article a while back (no I can't find it with the 2 minutes of searching I did) where a magazine compared the ticket sales of economic recessions during the 90's and early 2000's.
The summation of the article was that even with major blockbuster films, like Starwars ep 1, Hollywood made less money than the year before because times were good and people were doing things besides going to the movies, but in economic downturns they actually made more money.
The theory was that audiences will attend movies to distract them from all the problems that they have instead of stewing in them.I'll post it if I can find it but the laziness is running deep tonight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429060</id>
	<title>To be fair...</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1260785100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>before we happily claim their profits are climbing, could we overlay their profit graph with inflation graph?<br>Today's $10mln isn't the same as 10 years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>before we happily claim their profits are climbing , could we overlay their profit graph with inflation graph ? Today 's $ 10mln is n't the same as 10 years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>before we happily claim their profits are climbing, could we overlay their profit graph with inflation graph?Today's $10mln isn't the same as 10 years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427494</id>
	<title>Re:10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260720000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FAKE! No woman would move into your mom's basement with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FAKE !
No woman would move into your mom 's basement with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FAKE!
No woman would move into your mom's basement with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434850</id>
	<title>2 things for sure</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1260781740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it sounds like a lot, but remember that 10 years or so ago when titanic came out, it grossed over 1billion dollars with all its<br>sales and marketing. Back then this number would mean a lot, however I find now, this number is not conclusive to be compared to that of many years ago, of course it breaks records, we pay 15$ to go see a movie, where as back then it was 10$ or even 8$, so like saying 10 years ago I paid 50 cents a loaf of bread, and now I pay 1.50$, and the bread market is breaking record sales numbers,<br>is silly.</p><p>However, I do agree that it goes to show, the whole thing with the movie companies saying hey are losing all this money because of downloads is pure BS, I never would have paid money to go see The Hangover, but I would watch it if I downloaded it for free.<br>Does that mean they lost a sale, absolutely not! As well, there are movies that you just have to go see on the big screen (Transformers) that are meant for such a giant screen to get a full effect....I would pay even if I downloaded it for free.</p><p>It's all relative, what isn't is them making you feel bad for downloading something you never would have paid to go see in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it sounds like a lot , but remember that 10 years or so ago when titanic came out , it grossed over 1billion dollars with all itssales and marketing .
Back then this number would mean a lot , however I find now , this number is not conclusive to be compared to that of many years ago , of course it breaks records , we pay 15 $ to go see a movie , where as back then it was 10 $ or even 8 $ , so like saying 10 years ago I paid 50 cents a loaf of bread , and now I pay 1.50 $ , and the bread market is breaking record sales numbers,is silly.However , I do agree that it goes to show , the whole thing with the movie companies saying hey are losing all this money because of downloads is pure BS , I never would have paid money to go see The Hangover , but I would watch it if I downloaded it for free.Does that mean they lost a sale , absolutely not !
As well , there are movies that you just have to go see on the big screen ( Transformers ) that are meant for such a giant screen to get a full effect....I would pay even if I downloaded it for free.It 's all relative , what is n't is them making you feel bad for downloading something you never would have paid to go see in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it sounds like a lot, but remember that 10 years or so ago when titanic came out, it grossed over 1billion dollars with all itssales and marketing.
Back then this number would mean a lot, however I find now, this number is not conclusive to be compared to that of many years ago, of course it breaks records, we pay 15$ to go see a movie, where as back then it was 10$ or even 8$, so like saying 10 years ago I paid 50 cents a loaf of bread, and now I pay 1.50$, and the bread market is breaking record sales numbers,is silly.However, I do agree that it goes to show, the whole thing with the movie companies saying hey are losing all this money because of downloads is pure BS, I never would have paid money to go see The Hangover, but I would watch it if I downloaded it for free.Does that mean they lost a sale, absolutely not!
As well, there are movies that you just have to go see on the big screen (Transformers) that are meant for such a giant screen to get a full effect....I would pay even if I downloaded it for free.It's all relative, what isn't is them making you feel bad for downloading something you never would have paid to go see in the first place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427676</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260722160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because some of us aren't asshat smug dipshits who site in a dank cave and wonder why people want to be out amongst other people. Some people like to eat in restaurants too, which have been obsolete since food was invented too. Other people like to go to the gym instead of work out at home. Others like to go to the mall instead of order online. Other people like to talk face to face instead of on the phone. Weird huh. All these stupid people.</p><p>Perhaps its the fact that you are a dick and nobody wants to go see a movie with you.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because some of us are n't asshat smug dipshits who site in a dank cave and wonder why people want to be out amongst other people .
Some people like to eat in restaurants too , which have been obsolete since food was invented too .
Other people like to go to the gym instead of work out at home .
Others like to go to the mall instead of order online .
Other people like to talk face to face instead of on the phone .
Weird huh .
All these stupid people.Perhaps its the fact that you are a dick and nobody wants to go see a movie with you .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because some of us aren't asshat smug dipshits who site in a dank cave and wonder why people want to be out amongst other people.
Some people like to eat in restaurants too, which have been obsolete since food was invented too.
Other people like to go to the gym instead of work out at home.
Others like to go to the mall instead of order online.
Other people like to talk face to face instead of on the phone.
Weird huh.
All these stupid people.Perhaps its the fact that you are a dick and nobody wants to go see a movie with you.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427572</id>
	<title>Re:This analysis is totally ridiculous.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260720900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone uses gross profit when they talk about Hollywood because of Hollywood accounting. Kinda hard to make a Net Profit when ALL Gross Profit is written off as Expenses on future movies.</p><p>And as a reminder for non-economists : Gross profit - Expenses = Net Profit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone uses gross profit when they talk about Hollywood because of Hollywood accounting .
Kinda hard to make a Net Profit when ALL Gross Profit is written off as Expenses on future movies.And as a reminder for non-economists : Gross profit - Expenses = Net Profit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone uses gross profit when they talk about Hollywood because of Hollywood accounting.
Kinda hard to make a Net Profit when ALL Gross Profit is written off as Expenses on future movies.And as a reminder for non-economists : Gross profit - Expenses = Net Profit</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712</id>
	<title>Adjusted for Gold-based inflation...</title>
	<author>Dausha</author>
	<datestamp>1260712920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A different link:</p><p>"The expansion in world film revenues since 1970 has grown from $1.2 billion to over $15 billion annually according to the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA)."[link]</p><p>So, we have 10 billion mentioned, but another reference to 15 billion.</p><p>In 1970, an ounce of gold went for 35. Today it's 1,100. That's 31 times higher. So, in 1970 dollars (gold), the movie industry made about 320 million (@10 billion) or 483 million (@15 billion). That is forty percent (@15 billion) or 27 percent (@10 billion). I'm not saying they lost money, but that inflation is a killer.</p><p>[link]: <a href="http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty\_projects/terri/dystopia/mcauley/filmcost.html" title="uwaterloo.ca">http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty\_projects/terri/dystopia/mcauley/filmcost.html</a> [uwaterloo.ca]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A different link : " The expansion in world film revenues since 1970 has grown from $ 1.2 billion to over $ 15 billion annually according to the Motion Picture Association of America ( MPAA ) .
" [ link ] So , we have 10 billion mentioned , but another reference to 15 billion.In 1970 , an ounce of gold went for 35 .
Today it 's 1,100 .
That 's 31 times higher .
So , in 1970 dollars ( gold ) , the movie industry made about 320 million ( @ 10 billion ) or 483 million ( @ 15 billion ) .
That is forty percent ( @ 15 billion ) or 27 percent ( @ 10 billion ) .
I 'm not saying they lost money , but that inflation is a killer .
[ link ] : http : //www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty \ _projects/terri/dystopia/mcauley/filmcost.html [ uwaterloo.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A different link:"The expansion in world film revenues since 1970 has grown from $1.2 billion to over $15 billion annually according to the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).
"[link]So, we have 10 billion mentioned, but another reference to 15 billion.In 1970, an ounce of gold went for 35.
Today it's 1,100.
That's 31 times higher.
So, in 1970 dollars (gold), the movie industry made about 320 million (@10 billion) or 483 million (@15 billion).
That is forty percent (@15 billion) or 27 percent (@10 billion).
I'm not saying they lost money, but that inflation is a killer.
[link]: http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty\_projects/terri/dystopia/mcauley/filmcost.html [uwaterloo.ca]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428126</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Falkentyne</author>
	<datestamp>1260727320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometime around 2000/2001 is when ticket prices started jumping and I stopped going to the theater. The only reason I go now? 2 for 1 tickets through my credit card and even then I'm not sure it's worth it. I'm paying about $11 to $12 by buying the tickets online to get this "deal" otherwise the price of the tickets would be $22 plus paper/ink costs. I remember going to see the movies in LA back around 2001 and paying $8/ticket and thinking to myself what a fucking rip Los Angeles was.
<br> <br>
Now It's $10 - $11 everywhere around here (Orange County, CA / Los Angeles, CA). Why pay for overpriced tickets with yelling kids when I can BUY the movie for less? I can have a couple friends over, pop the movie in my dvd player/bluray player and watch it on my 46" lcd tv with a gin &amp; tonic in one hand and tasty pizza in the other while sitting in a reclining couch.
<br> <br>
If they dropped the price of movie tickets I'm sure you'd see an increase in ticket sales and a higher profit due to the volume of movie goers. More people in the theater = more profit for theaters as well due to concession sales which are way overfucking priced too. Seriously? $4 - $5 for a large soda? That's like three 2 liter bottles WITH CRV (what a rip that is). Man... who's the pirate now? Hollywood = butt pirates trying to rape everyone.
<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometime around 2000/2001 is when ticket prices started jumping and I stopped going to the theater .
The only reason I go now ?
2 for 1 tickets through my credit card and even then I 'm not sure it 's worth it .
I 'm paying about $ 11 to $ 12 by buying the tickets online to get this " deal " otherwise the price of the tickets would be $ 22 plus paper/ink costs .
I remember going to see the movies in LA back around 2001 and paying $ 8/ticket and thinking to myself what a fucking rip Los Angeles was .
Now It 's $ 10 - $ 11 everywhere around here ( Orange County , CA / Los Angeles , CA ) .
Why pay for overpriced tickets with yelling kids when I can BUY the movie for less ?
I can have a couple friends over , pop the movie in my dvd player/bluray player and watch it on my 46 " lcd tv with a gin &amp; tonic in one hand and tasty pizza in the other while sitting in a reclining couch .
If they dropped the price of movie tickets I 'm sure you 'd see an increase in ticket sales and a higher profit due to the volume of movie goers .
More people in the theater = more profit for theaters as well due to concession sales which are way overfucking priced too .
Seriously ? $ 4 - $ 5 for a large soda ?
That 's like three 2 liter bottles WITH CRV ( what a rip that is ) .
Man... who 's the pirate now ?
Hollywood = butt pirates trying to rape everyone .
/rant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometime around 2000/2001 is when ticket prices started jumping and I stopped going to the theater.
The only reason I go now?
2 for 1 tickets through my credit card and even then I'm not sure it's worth it.
I'm paying about $11 to $12 by buying the tickets online to get this "deal" otherwise the price of the tickets would be $22 plus paper/ink costs.
I remember going to see the movies in LA back around 2001 and paying $8/ticket and thinking to myself what a fucking rip Los Angeles was.
Now It's $10 - $11 everywhere around here (Orange County, CA / Los Angeles, CA).
Why pay for overpriced tickets with yelling kids when I can BUY the movie for less?
I can have a couple friends over, pop the movie in my dvd player/bluray player and watch it on my 46" lcd tv with a gin &amp; tonic in one hand and tasty pizza in the other while sitting in a reclining couch.
If they dropped the price of movie tickets I'm sure you'd see an increase in ticket sales and a higher profit due to the volume of movie goers.
More people in the theater = more profit for theaters as well due to concession sales which are way overfucking priced too.
Seriously? $4 - $5 for a large soda?
That's like three 2 liter bottles WITH CRV (what a rip that is).
Man... who's the pirate now?
Hollywood = butt pirates trying to rape everyone.
/rant</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260727440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't like the movie studios much but the article is highly misleading, it only mentions total revenue and if you dig into the articles the article itself references it clearly shows a declining profit per movie and less movies being made which kinda supports the studios positions. Personally though I think the declining profit is because most movies made nowadays are utter shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't like the movie studios much but the article is highly misleading , it only mentions total revenue and if you dig into the articles the article itself references it clearly shows a declining profit per movie and less movies being made which kinda supports the studios positions .
Personally though I think the declining profit is because most movies made nowadays are utter shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't like the movie studios much but the article is highly misleading, it only mentions total revenue and if you dig into the articles the article itself references it clearly shows a declining profit per movie and less movies being made which kinda supports the studios positions.
Personally though I think the declining profit is because most movies made nowadays are utter shit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</p></div><p>Yes, and it should.<br> <br>
If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence.  All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.  The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads, without worry of scratching or losing, and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf.<br> <br>
All of this is free.<br> <br>
As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition.  Adding value for movie studios is easy.  They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies.  The added value is already there.  However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.<br> <br>
Currently, they aren't even close.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although the impact is far less than they claim , I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US.Yes , and it should .
If I want to pirate a movie , I can go to a single site , find multiple options ( 1080p , 720p , ipod , ect ) for just about every movie in existence .
All of which are " in stock " and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store .
The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads , without worry of scratching or losing , and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf .
All of this is free .
As most technical people are very aware , if I 'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available , I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition .
Adding value for movie studios is easy .
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies .
The added value is already there .
However , to add value , they need to provide an equivalent experience .
Currently , they are n't even close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.Yes, and it should.
If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence.
All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.
The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads, without worry of scratching or losing, and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf.
All of this is free.
As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition.
Adding value for movie studios is easy.
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies.
The added value is already there.
However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.
Currently, they aren't even close.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427930</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>shark72</author>
	<datestamp>1260724860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>"If I remember correctly, the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups, like the writer, director (I think), and actors. I don't think any of the construction workers, camera operators, or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary."</i> </p><p>This confused a LOT of file sharing enthusiasts back when those ads were running. You're right, of course, that the trade and craft folks are paid on a salary, but the straw man here is assuming that the ads were trying to imply otherwise.</p><p>The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales, which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry, which in turn leads to fewer films being made (ie. studios taking fewer chances on risky, smaller productions) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.</p><p>That theory in itself invites enough debate without having to throw in the "the salaried employees have already been paid" straw man. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If I remember correctly , the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups , like the writer , director ( I think ) , and actors .
I do n't think any of the construction workers , camera operators , or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary .
" This confused a LOT of file sharing enthusiasts back when those ads were running .
You 're right , of course , that the trade and craft folks are paid on a salary , but the straw man here is assuming that the ads were trying to imply otherwise.The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales , which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry , which in turn leads to fewer films being made ( ie .
studios taking fewer chances on risky , smaller productions ) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.That theory in itself invites enough debate without having to throw in the " the salaried employees have already been paid " straw man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "If I remember correctly, the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups, like the writer, director (I think), and actors.
I don't think any of the construction workers, camera operators, or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary.
" This confused a LOT of file sharing enthusiasts back when those ads were running.
You're right, of course, that the trade and craft folks are paid on a salary, but the straw man here is assuming that the ads were trying to imply otherwise.The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales, which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry, which in turn leads to fewer films being made (ie.
studios taking fewer chances on risky, smaller productions) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.That theory in itself invites enough debate without having to throw in the "the salaried employees have already been paid" straw man. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429048</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Pastis</author>
	<datestamp>1260784920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like more information:</p><p>* number of available seats in the country per year<br>* average cinema fill rate per year<br>* number of people owning a home cinema<br>* average salary<br>* average amount of money spent by people on fun activities (movies, games, internet, phone) per year<br>* average age of people going to the movie</p><p>there are so many factors.</p><p>Here are some questions to ask yourselves:</p><p>* do people have more or less money available to use on movies ?<br>* do people use their money differently because of other more meaningful activities (games, communications) ?<br>* do people prefer to rent by a DVD/blueray and watch it home with friends and a beer instead of going to the movie ? (cheaper, friendlier)</p><p>Sure piracy has some effect. But everything ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like more information : * number of available seats in the country per year * average cinema fill rate per year * number of people owning a home cinema * average salary * average amount of money spent by people on fun activities ( movies , games , internet , phone ) per year * average age of people going to the moviethere are so many factors.Here are some questions to ask yourselves : * do people have more or less money available to use on movies ?
* do people use their money differently because of other more meaningful activities ( games , communications ) ?
* do people prefer to rent by a DVD/blueray and watch it home with friends and a beer instead of going to the movie ?
( cheaper , friendlier ) Sure piracy has some effect .
But everything ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like more information:* number of available seats in the country per year* average cinema fill rate per year* number of people owning a home cinema* average salary* average amount of money spent by people on fun activities (movies, games, internet, phone) per year* average age of people going to the moviethere are so many factors.Here are some questions to ask yourselves:* do people have more or less money available to use on movies ?
* do people use their money differently because of other more meaningful activities (games, communications) ?
* do people prefer to rent by a DVD/blueray and watch it home with friends and a beer instead of going to the movie ?
(cheaper, friendlier)Sure piracy has some effect.
But everything ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430004</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1260799680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; So, the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate?<br>&gt; We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich? Well, because that's what<br>&gt; the whining here sounds like.</p><p>No. It's justification to ignore their drama queen antics and cries for further legal concessions.</p><p>Clearly the status quo is fine for them. They don't need any new laws. They don't even need<br>many of the recent changes to the law. They certainly don't require mass prosecutions, the<br>wholesale destruction of people's lives, or the the destruction of individual liberties,<br>consumer rights and consumer product protections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; So , the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate ? &gt; We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich ?
Well , because that 's what &gt; the whining here sounds like.No .
It 's justification to ignore their drama queen antics and cries for further legal concessions.Clearly the status quo is fine for them .
They do n't need any new laws .
They do n't even needmany of the recent changes to the law .
They certainly do n't require mass prosecutions , thewholesale destruction of people 's lives , or the the destruction of individual liberties,consumer rights and consumer product protections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; So, the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate?&gt; We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich?
Well, because that's what&gt; the whining here sounds like.No.
It's justification to ignore their drama queen antics and cries for further legal concessions.Clearly the status quo is fine for them.
They don't need any new laws.
They don't even needmany of the recent changes to the law.
They certainly don't require mass prosecutions, thewholesale destruction of people's lives, or the the destruction of individual liberties,consumer rights and consumer product protections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426640</id>
	<title>Unbelievable growth</title>
	<author>easyEmu</author>
	<datestamp>1260712380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>To me, it is remarkable that for an industry that has been around for more than a century, is this large, and has become so integral to the lives of North Americans, that somehow, a growth rate of over 11\% is achievable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , it is remarkable that for an industry that has been around for more than a century , is this large , and has become so integral to the lives of North Americans , that somehow , a growth rate of over 11 \ % is achievable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, it is remarkable that for an industry that has been around for more than a century, is this large, and has become so integral to the lives of North Americans, that somehow, a growth rate of over 11\% is achievable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427430</id>
	<title>Good job.</title>
	<author>Xeno man</author>
	<datestamp>1260719040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I guess the RIAA and MPAA boycott is going really well. Keep it up guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess the RIAA and MPAA boycott is going really well .
Keep it up guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess the RIAA and MPAA boycott is going really well.
Keep it up guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428340</id>
	<title>Re:typical spin job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260730140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>where are my fucking mod points?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>where are my fucking mod points ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where are my fucking mod points?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586</id>
	<title>typical spin job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260711900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the box office receipts were way DOWN, someone here would post, "Clearly, the Hollywood moguls are out of touch with what moviegoers are interest in seeing.  Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starlets, and stop hiring yesterday's stars like Tom Cruise for $20 million a flick.  Hello?  That, not downloading, is what ails Hollywood today".</p><p>And every post contributing in support of that conclusion would be modded up.  Maybe we'll get that a year from now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the box office receipts were way DOWN , someone here would post , " Clearly , the Hollywood moguls are out of touch with what moviegoers are interest in seeing .
Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starlets , and stop hiring yesterday 's stars like Tom Cruise for $ 20 million a flick .
Hello ? That , not downloading , is what ails Hollywood today " .And every post contributing in support of that conclusion would be modded up .
Maybe we 'll get that a year from now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the box office receipts were way DOWN, someone here would post, "Clearly, the Hollywood moguls are out of touch with what moviegoers are interest in seeing.
Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starlets, and stop hiring yesterday's stars like Tom Cruise for $20 million a flick.
Hello?  That, not downloading, is what ails Hollywood today".And every post contributing in support of that conclusion would be modded up.
Maybe we'll get that a year from now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427620</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1260721560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"We couldn't have made 10 Billion if it weren't for all of those music pirates!"</p></div><p>Fixed that for you.</p><p>And I mean it.  Movies have the benefit of being social occasions, where groups of kids go to see a movie and share their thoughts after etc.  It's a fraction the cost of a concert by the pop musicians they download, and recorded music doesn't stand a chance for their entertainment dollar.  "Hrm, should I actually buy one of the 500 CD's I've downloaded, or should I try to make out with that new girl during Twilight, having already downloaded it too to see that it sucks..."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We could n't have made 10 Billion if it were n't for all of those music pirates !
" Fixed that for you.And I mean it .
Movies have the benefit of being social occasions , where groups of kids go to see a movie and share their thoughts after etc .
It 's a fraction the cost of a concert by the pop musicians they download , and recorded music does n't stand a chance for their entertainment dollar .
" Hrm , should I actually buy one of the 500 CD 's I 've downloaded , or should I try to make out with that new girl during Twilight , having already downloaded it too to see that it sucks... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We couldn't have made 10 Billion if it weren't for all of those music pirates!
"Fixed that for you.And I mean it.
Movies have the benefit of being social occasions, where groups of kids go to see a movie and share their thoughts after etc.
It's a fraction the cost of a concert by the pop musicians they download, and recorded music doesn't stand a chance for their entertainment dollar.
"Hrm, should I actually buy one of the 500 CD's I've downloaded, or should I try to make out with that new girl during Twilight, having already downloaded it too to see that it sucks..."
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426914</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>wtbname</author>
	<datestamp>1260714540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sooooo....</p><p>What you are saying is that the Movie Industry made more movies, and more money than ever before, despite their claims of piracy hooligans destroying their business, but that it's all an illusion based on your rigorous statistical analysis, and out of line reference to the horrible disease, AIDS.</p><p>???</p><p>Profit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sooooo....What you are saying is that the Movie Industry made more movies , and more money than ever before , despite their claims of piracy hooligans destroying their business , but that it 's all an illusion based on your rigorous statistical analysis , and out of line reference to the horrible disease , AIDS. ? ?
? Profit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sooooo....What you are saying is that the Movie Industry made more movies, and more money than ever before, despite their claims of piracy hooligans destroying their business, but that it's all an illusion based on your rigorous statistical analysis, and out of line reference to the horrible disease, AIDS.??
?Profit?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426832</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260714000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, in LA a lot of companies have gone under because Hollywood pretty much pulled out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , in LA a lot of companies have gone under because Hollywood pretty much pulled out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, in LA a lot of companies have gone under because Hollywood pretty much pulled out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430808</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260805200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2002 Also happened to be the year that the cheap Chinese DVD players flooded the US market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2002 Also happened to be the year that the cheap Chinese DVD players flooded the US market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2002 Also happened to be the year that the cheap Chinese DVD players flooded the US market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427076</id>
	<title>Re:Adjusted for Gold-based inflation...</title>
	<author>Katchu</author>
	<datestamp>1260715860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And look at the run-down hovels those starving folks live in--must we force them to bike to the studio? Oh. The horror.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And look at the run-down hovels those starving folks live in--must we force them to bike to the studio ?
Oh. The horror .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And look at the run-down hovels those starving folks live in--must we force them to bike to the studio?
Oh. The horror.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427312</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1260717960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and doing things with them.  Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my family.  Because thieves steal my work online."</p></div><p>If I remember correctly, the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups, like the writer, director (I think), and actors. I don't think any of the construction workers, camera operators, or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double , key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families , eating and doing things with them .
Then they would look up and say something to effect of , " I ca n't feed my family .
Because thieves steal my work online .
" If I remember correctly , the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups , like the writer , director ( I think ) , and actors .
I do n't think any of the construction workers , camera operators , or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and doing things with them.
Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my family.
Because thieves steal my work online.
"If I remember correctly, the amusing part of that is that the only ones that get paid royalties are the big-name groups, like the writer, director (I think), and actors.
I don't think any of the construction workers, camera operators, or costume designers get anything other than a straight salary.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426536</id>
	<title>HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260711420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait, this the MPAA? Sorry, I get my robber baron Associations of America mixed up from time to time. Carry on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , this the MPAA ?
Sorry , I get my robber baron Associations of America mixed up from time to time .
Carry on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, this the MPAA?
Sorry, I get my robber baron Associations of America mixed up from time to time.
Carry on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427176</id>
	<title>Does that ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260716640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... $10 billion include the overpriced popcorn?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... $ 10 billion include the overpriced popcorn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... $10 billion include the overpriced popcorn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427256</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260717360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Increasing revenues correlating with increasing piracy also dovetails with the argument that piracy helps sales - piracy leads to more viewing leads to more discussion leads to more people being interested leads to more sales.  I'm not sure I agree with this premise, but this data would seem to make it plausible at any rate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Increasing revenues correlating with increasing piracy also dovetails with the argument that piracy helps sales - piracy leads to more viewing leads to more discussion leads to more people being interested leads to more sales .
I 'm not sure I agree with this premise , but this data would seem to make it plausible at any rate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Increasing revenues correlating with increasing piracy also dovetails with the argument that piracy helps sales - piracy leads to more viewing leads to more discussion leads to more people being interested leads to more sales.
I'm not sure I agree with this premise, but this data would seem to make it plausible at any rate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427936</id>
	<title>Box Office is a Small Part of the Equation</title>
	<author>bman08</author>
	<datestamp>1260724860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is great news for the small percentage of movies that get theatrical release.  But DVD numbers are in the toilet, and that's a critical revenue stream for all your low budget and indie stuff. I'm loathe to imply that piracy does or doesn't have anything to do with the problem but this article does not paint an accurate picture of where the movie business is at.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great news for the small percentage of movies that get theatrical release .
But DVD numbers are in the toilet , and that 's a critical revenue stream for all your low budget and indie stuff .
I 'm loathe to imply that piracy does or does n't have anything to do with the problem but this article does not paint an accurate picture of where the movie business is at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great news for the small percentage of movies that get theatrical release.
But DVD numbers are in the toilet, and that's a critical revenue stream for all your low budget and indie stuff.
I'm loathe to imply that piracy does or doesn't have anything to do with the problem but this article does not paint an accurate picture of where the movie business is at.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429470</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1260791940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a suggestion:</p><p>Scenario:<br>Movie studio office, 1930's style. Large expensive looking desk, semi-naked woman lying in it. Big fat movie executive wearing a 1930's style suit, holding a large lit cigar in his hand sitting on a chair behind the desk. Behind him, a window shows a sunny Californian day, with some palm-trees and an expensive sports car visible.<br>Around the office, other similar looking man are sitting in sofas surrounded by beautiful semi-claded women. Expensive looking sculptures and paintings are spread all over the office (possibly including one or two well known paintings).</p><p>Action:<br>Camera pans around the office, centers on the executive sitting in the chair with the desk (and woman) in front and the window behind.<br>Executive snorts a line of coke from the woman's belly, turns to the camera and says:<br>"I can't feed my family. Because thieves steal my work online."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a suggestion : Scenario : Movie studio office , 1930 's style .
Large expensive looking desk , semi-naked woman lying in it .
Big fat movie executive wearing a 1930 's style suit , holding a large lit cigar in his hand sitting on a chair behind the desk .
Behind him , a window shows a sunny Californian day , with some palm-trees and an expensive sports car visible.Around the office , other similar looking man are sitting in sofas surrounded by beautiful semi-claded women .
Expensive looking sculptures and paintings are spread all over the office ( possibly including one or two well known paintings ) .Action : Camera pans around the office , centers on the executive sitting in the chair with the desk ( and woman ) in front and the window behind.Executive snorts a line of coke from the woman 's belly , turns to the camera and says : " I ca n't feed my family .
Because thieves steal my work online .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a suggestion:Scenario:Movie studio office, 1930's style.
Large expensive looking desk, semi-naked woman lying in it.
Big fat movie executive wearing a 1930's style suit, holding a large lit cigar in his hand sitting on a chair behind the desk.
Behind him, a window shows a sunny Californian day, with some palm-trees and an expensive sports car visible.Around the office, other similar looking man are sitting in sofas surrounded by beautiful semi-claded women.
Expensive looking sculptures and paintings are spread all over the office (possibly including one or two well known paintings).Action:Camera pans around the office, centers on the executive sitting in the chair with the desk (and woman) in front and the window behind.Executive snorts a line of coke from the woman's belly, turns to the camera and says:"I can't feed my family.
Because thieves steal my work online.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431362</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1260808080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Going to the movies should be compared to visiting concerts or theatre. It is the experience. Personally I prefer concerts over movies, and either over the recording (or radio resp. TV broadcast).
</p><p>Recorded music may be compared to DVD. You buy a copy, play it at your leisure at home or on the go, but it misses the crowd, the band on stage or the large screen, etc. It's not the same.
</p><p>Any numbers by the way on pop concert visits? Not just the big guys but also local club ticket sales. Could be interesting as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Going to the movies should be compared to visiting concerts or theatre .
It is the experience .
Personally I prefer concerts over movies , and either over the recording ( or radio resp .
TV broadcast ) .
Recorded music may be compared to DVD .
You buy a copy , play it at your leisure at home or on the go , but it misses the crowd , the band on stage or the large screen , etc .
It 's not the same .
Any numbers by the way on pop concert visits ?
Not just the big guys but also local club ticket sales .
Could be interesting as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Going to the movies should be compared to visiting concerts or theatre.
It is the experience.
Personally I prefer concerts over movies, and either over the recording (or radio resp.
TV broadcast).
Recorded music may be compared to DVD.
You buy a copy, play it at your leisure at home or on the go, but it misses the crowd, the band on stage or the large screen, etc.
It's not the same.
Any numbers by the way on pop concert visits?
Not just the big guys but also local club ticket sales.
Could be interesting as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427264</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1260717600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account?</p></div><p>From the summary: "With an estimated $10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office, the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars."
<br> <br>
If inflation were somewhere around 10\%, I would imagine that we'd have bigger problems to deal with.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account ? From the summary : " With an estimated $ 10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office , the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars .
" If inflation were somewhere around 10 \ % , I would imagine that we 'd have bigger problems to deal with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account?From the summary: "With an estimated $10.6 billion in consumer spending at the US and Canadian box office, the movie industry will break the 2008 record by nearly a billion dollars.
"
 
If inflation were somewhere around 10\%, I would imagine that we'd have bigger problems to deal with.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427250</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>kklein</author>
	<datestamp>1260717360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food, followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food, followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa, with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds' walking distance?

</p><p>Sorry. You fail at dating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food , followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food , followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa , with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds ' walking distance ?
Sorry. You fail at dating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food, followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food, followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa, with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds' walking distance?
Sorry. You fail at dating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30437884</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>An Onerous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1260796620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence. All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>The selection is great, but how do I turn off the Swedish subtitiles?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I want to pirate a movie , I can go to a single site , find multiple options ( 1080p , 720p , ipod , ect ) for just about every movie in existence .
All of which are " in stock " and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store .
The selection is great , but how do I turn off the Swedish subtitiles ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence.
All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.
The selection is great, but how do I turn off the Swedish subtitiles?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429208</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>xous</author>
	<datestamp>1260787740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't set foot inside a theater since around 2000.</p><p>Reasons:<br>Cost: $15 for a ticket. $10 for a drink. Fuck that.<br>Movie Quality: I haven't seen anything worth more than the two hours to watch it in a long time.<br>Comfort: I ain't going to sit in a crappy chair with who knows what on the seat when I can sit at home with similar quality picture and audio.<br>Time: Why do it on their time tables when you can turn the shit on anytime you want and pause the fucking thing any time you want?<br>MPAA: I'll buy used movies before I'll pay them a fucking dime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't set foot inside a theater since around 2000.Reasons : Cost : $ 15 for a ticket .
$ 10 for a drink .
Fuck that.Movie Quality : I have n't seen anything worth more than the two hours to watch it in a long time.Comfort : I ai n't going to sit in a crappy chair with who knows what on the seat when I can sit at home with similar quality picture and audio.Time : Why do it on their time tables when you can turn the shit on anytime you want and pause the fucking thing any time you want ? MPAA : I 'll buy used movies before I 'll pay them a fucking dime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't set foot inside a theater since around 2000.Reasons:Cost: $15 for a ticket.
$10 for a drink.
Fuck that.Movie Quality: I haven't seen anything worth more than the two hours to watch it in a long time.Comfort: I ain't going to sit in a crappy chair with who knows what on the seat when I can sit at home with similar quality picture and audio.Time: Why do it on their time tables when you can turn the shit on anytime you want and pause the fucking thing any time you want?MPAA: I'll buy used movies before I'll pay them a fucking dime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427000</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1260715200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience. Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</p></div><p>Overall people don't mind going to movies. After all, if the film is good and the projectionist is good, then it is (or should be) a great experience. It's not the same thing as the recorded music business, which was never about providing the total experience like movies have been for ages. I suppose a better parallel to a movie is a music concert. Again, it's about the whole experience and people don't mind paying for that. (Well, most people anyway. Enough to make it potentially very profitable.)</p><p>The threat posed by the internet to movies is not really piracy. It's that it is a different, new thing for Joe Sixpack to spend his entertainment money on. Is that a problem yet for the movie industry? Probably not, but that's where the real issue is. Note that this is not a legal threat. It's a threat to the very basis of getting such a large proportion of the national entertainment spend. Hollywood have long tried to counter this with things like film tie-ins, special websites, etc, with varying success. Will that change? No idea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience .
Although the impact is far less than they claim , I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US.Overall people do n't mind going to movies .
After all , if the film is good and the projectionist is good , then it is ( or should be ) a great experience .
It 's not the same thing as the recorded music business , which was never about providing the total experience like movies have been for ages .
I suppose a better parallel to a movie is a music concert .
Again , it 's about the whole experience and people do n't mind paying for that .
( Well , most people anyway .
Enough to make it potentially very profitable .
) The threat posed by the internet to movies is not really piracy .
It 's that it is a different , new thing for Joe Sixpack to spend his entertainment money on .
Is that a problem yet for the movie industry ?
Probably not , but that 's where the real issue is .
Note that this is not a legal threat .
It 's a threat to the very basis of getting such a large proportion of the national entertainment spend .
Hollywood have long tried to counter this with things like film tie-ins , special websites , etc , with varying success .
Will that change ?
No idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience.
Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.Overall people don't mind going to movies.
After all, if the film is good and the projectionist is good, then it is (or should be) a great experience.
It's not the same thing as the recorded music business, which was never about providing the total experience like movies have been for ages.
I suppose a better parallel to a movie is a music concert.
Again, it's about the whole experience and people don't mind paying for that.
(Well, most people anyway.
Enough to make it potentially very profitable.
)The threat posed by the internet to movies is not really piracy.
It's that it is a different, new thing for Joe Sixpack to spend his entertainment money on.
Is that a problem yet for the movie industry?
Probably not, but that's where the real issue is.
Note that this is not a legal threat.
It's a threat to the very basis of getting such a large proportion of the national entertainment spend.
Hollywood have long tried to counter this with things like film tie-ins, special websites, etc, with varying success.
Will that change?
No idea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427490</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1260720000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When Stan Lee had to sue to get his cut of the proceeds from SpiderMan, I started to look at the MPAA's kvetching about pirates<br>with a jaundiced eye. If they want us to care about alleged copyright infringement, then don't try to fuck over the icons that made us<br>into fans and made them rich(er).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When Stan Lee had to sue to get his cut of the proceeds from SpiderMan , I started to look at the MPAA 's kvetching about pirateswith a jaundiced eye .
If they want us to care about alleged copyright infringement , then do n't try to fuck over the icons that made usinto fans and made them rich ( er ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Stan Lee had to sue to get his cut of the proceeds from SpiderMan, I started to look at the MPAA's kvetching about pirateswith a jaundiced eye.
If they want us to care about alleged copyright infringement, then don't try to fuck over the icons that made usinto fans and made them rich(er).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</id>
	<title>Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260711720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that news stories about movie revenues never take inflation into account?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430604</id>
	<title>John Kerry's missed votes</title>
	<author>Oh Gawwd Peak Oil</author>
	<datestamp>1260804240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years. Something like <b>1000 or more a year according to Fox News.</b> </i> </p><p>Did Fox News really say that?  I guess with their usual level of honesty I wouldn't be surprised.</p><p>In fact, the number is really 623 <b>total</b> since 1989, about 9\% of the total, and most of them were during his campaign.  At other times he was usually around average.  See <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300060&amp;tab=votes" title="govtrack.us" rel="nofollow">this</a> [govtrack.us] link.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years .
Something like 1000 or more a year according to Fox News .
Did Fox News really say that ?
I guess with their usual level of honesty I would n't be surprised.In fact , the number is really 623 total since 1989 , about 9 \ % of the total , and most of them were during his campaign .
At other times he was usually around average .
See this [ govtrack.us ] link .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years.
Something like 1000 or more a year according to Fox News.
Did Fox News really say that?
I guess with their usual level of honesty I wouldn't be surprised.In fact, the number is really 623 total since 1989, about 9\% of the total, and most of them were during his campaign.
At other times he was usually around average.
See this [govtrack.us] link.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431744</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260809520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll tell you why 2002 was such a banner year for ticket sales:</p><p>1. Spider-Man (2002)<br>2. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)<br>3. Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)<br>4. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)<br>5. My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)<br>6. Signs (2002)<br>7. Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)<br>8. Men in Black II (2002)<br>9. Ice Age (2002)<br>10. Chicago (2002)</p><p>Has there been a year since with movies with such box office clout?</p><p>It's more about product than anything else. Give the people what they want and they'll gladly line up and shell out their $10. It's not rocket science and you don't have to be a Slashdot regular to figure it out.</p><p>Hollywood has been making crappy movies lately.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll tell you why 2002 was such a banner year for ticket sales : 1 .
Spider-Man ( 2002 ) 2 .
The Lord of the Rings : The Two Towers ( 2002 ) 3 .
Star Wars : Episode II - Attack of the Clones ( 2002 ) 4 .
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets ( 2002 ) 5 .
My Big Fat Greek Wedding ( 2002 ) 6 .
Signs ( 2002 ) 7 .
Austin Powers in Goldmember ( 2002 ) 8 .
Men in Black II ( 2002 ) 9 .
Ice Age ( 2002 ) 10 .
Chicago ( 2002 ) Has there been a year since with movies with such box office clout ? It 's more about product than anything else .
Give the people what they want and they 'll gladly line up and shell out their $ 10 .
It 's not rocket science and you do n't have to be a Slashdot regular to figure it out.Hollywood has been making crappy movies lately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll tell you why 2002 was such a banner year for ticket sales:1.
Spider-Man (2002)2.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)3.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)4.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)5.
My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)6.
Signs (2002)7.
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)8.
Men in Black II (2002)9.
Ice Age (2002)10.
Chicago (2002)Has there been a year since with movies with such box office clout?It's more about product than anything else.
Give the people what they want and they'll gladly line up and shell out their $10.
It's not rocket science and you don't have to be a Slashdot regular to figure it out.Hollywood has been making crappy movies lately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427942</id>
	<title>It Has Happened Before</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1260724980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       I used to manage theatres and the industry is quite aware that hard times are good news in the movie industry. The Great Depression was a boom for theatres. These days a lot of the gate may not be in box office receits but from other modes of distribution.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The theory was that normal people under great stress report to theatres as an escape. Conversely more deviant personalities resorted to bars or gambling during hard times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to manage theatres and the industry is quite aware that hard times are good news in the movie industry .
The Great Depression was a boom for theatres .
These days a lot of the gate may not be in box office receits but from other modes of distribution .
              The theory was that normal people under great stress report to theatres as an escape .
Conversely more deviant personalities resorted to bars or gambling during hard times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       I used to manage theatres and the industry is quite aware that hard times are good news in the movie industry.
The Great Depression was a boom for theatres.
These days a lot of the gate may not be in box office receits but from other modes of distribution.
              The theory was that normal people under great stress report to theatres as an escape.
Conversely more deviant personalities resorted to bars or gambling during hard times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431630</id>
	<title>$10B+ and counting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260809100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No Avatar yet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No Avatar yet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Avatar yet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431266</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260807660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</p></div><p>Yes, and it should.</p><p>If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence.  All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.  The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads, without worry of scratching or losing, and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf.</p><p>All of this is free.</p><p>As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition.  Adding value for movie studios is easy.  They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies.  The added value is already there.  However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.</p><p>Currently, they aren't even close.</p></div><p>This!!</p><p>I used to buy all my movies and would again if I had anything even remotely close to the convenience of downloading them.  Currently I have my entire movie collection on my server with a moded xbox to access them and watch them on my TV.  If I want to watch a movie, couple clicks with the remote and there it is.  No finding the case, no cases without disks, or wrong disks in them, no FBI warnings or 20min of commercials. </p><p>Should any site have any movie (read: Not limited selection) with the ease of pirated movies and the quality of having the DVD in a simple, non-drm, commercial free format, I would gladly pay for the movies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although the impact is far less than they claim , I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US.Yes , and it should.If I want to pirate a movie , I can go to a single site , find multiple options ( 1080p , 720p , ipod , ect ) for just about every movie in existence .
All of which are " in stock " and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store .
The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads , without worry of scratching or losing , and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf.All of this is free.As most technical people are very aware , if I 'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available , I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition .
Adding value for movie studios is easy .
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies .
The added value is already there .
However , to add value , they need to provide an equivalent experience.Currently , they are n't even close.This !
! I used to buy all my movies and would again if I had anything even remotely close to the convenience of downloading them .
Currently I have my entire movie collection on my server with a moded xbox to access them and watch them on my TV .
If I want to watch a movie , couple clicks with the remote and there it is .
No finding the case , no cases without disks , or wrong disks in them , no FBI warnings or 20min of commercials .
Should any site have any movie ( read : Not limited selection ) with the ease of pirated movies and the quality of having the DVD in a simple , non-drm , commercial free format , I would gladly pay for the movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.Yes, and it should.If I want to pirate a movie, I can go to a single site, find multiple options (1080p, 720p, ipod, ect) for just about every movie in existence.
All of which are "in stock" and most of which I can download to my computer in less time it would take to drive to the store.
The movie is presented to me without unskippable ads, without worry of scratching or losing, and can be archived without taking up space on my shelf.All of this is free.As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition.
Adding value for movie studios is easy.
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies.
The added value is already there.
However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.Currently, they aren't even close.This!
!I used to buy all my movies and would again if I had anything even remotely close to the convenience of downloading them.
Currently I have my entire movie collection on my server with a moded xbox to access them and watch them on my TV.
If I want to watch a movie, couple clicks with the remote and there it is.
No finding the case, no cases without disks, or wrong disks in them, no FBI warnings or 20min of commercials.
Should any site have any movie (read: Not limited selection) with the ease of pirated movies and the quality of having the DVD in a simple, non-drm, commercial free format, I would gladly pay for the movies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431016</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260806340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Profits are not declining, they only want to make you think that they are. Look up Hollywood Accounting in wiki. Essentially, it's a sneaky technique that "hides" profits and allows you to pay less taxes while complaining that you're not making any money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Profits are not declining , they only want to make you think that they are .
Look up Hollywood Accounting in wiki .
Essentially , it 's a sneaky technique that " hides " profits and allows you to pay less taxes while complaining that you 're not making any money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Profits are not declining, they only want to make you think that they are.
Look up Hollywood Accounting in wiki.
Essentially, it's a sneaky technique that "hides" profits and allows you to pay less taxes while complaining that you're not making any money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429054</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>JasterBobaMereel</author>
	<datestamp>1260785040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to go to the Cinema an watch movies - and thought it was worth it</p><p>Now I stay at home and watch movies<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... the same movies because the new ones are frankly mostly rubbish<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to go to the Cinema an watch movies - and thought it was worth itNow I stay at home and watch movies ..... the same movies because the new ones are frankly mostly rubbish .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to go to the Cinema an watch movies - and thought it was worth itNow I stay at home and watch movies ..... the same movies because the new ones are frankly mostly rubbish ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30436442</id>
	<title>What's the context?</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1260789720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Increased revenue and decreased profits are not mutually exclusive events.  If I increase the price of a can of soda by 10\% then my revenue goes up, assuming that sales remain constant or decrease by less than 10\%.  But if my cost to provide that can of soda went up by 12\%, then my profit goes *down* in the same scenario, perhaps even negative.</p><p>Also, the profit can increase in absolute terms for the industry as a whole while each player experiences decreased profit individually.  This can happen simply by increasing the number of players.  And before you infer that increased participation indicates healthy growth, consider the real estate market.</p><p>In short, these figures are meaningless without context, and certainly not worth using as the basis for any rational argument.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Increased revenue and decreased profits are not mutually exclusive events .
If I increase the price of a can of soda by 10 \ % then my revenue goes up , assuming that sales remain constant or decrease by less than 10 \ % .
But if my cost to provide that can of soda went up by 12 \ % , then my profit goes * down * in the same scenario , perhaps even negative.Also , the profit can increase in absolute terms for the industry as a whole while each player experiences decreased profit individually .
This can happen simply by increasing the number of players .
And before you infer that increased participation indicates healthy growth , consider the real estate market.In short , these figures are meaningless without context , and certainly not worth using as the basis for any rational argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Increased revenue and decreased profits are not mutually exclusive events.
If I increase the price of a can of soda by 10\% then my revenue goes up, assuming that sales remain constant or decrease by less than 10\%.
But if my cost to provide that can of soda went up by 12\%, then my profit goes *down* in the same scenario, perhaps even negative.Also, the profit can increase in absolute terms for the industry as a whole while each player experiences decreased profit individually.
This can happen simply by increasing the number of players.
And before you infer that increased participation indicates healthy growth, consider the real estate market.In short, these figures are meaningless without context, and certainly not worth using as the basis for any rational argument.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427310</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>rockNme2349</author>
	<datestamp>1260717960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://15.media.tumblr.com/tumblr\_kpcvvy3eqK1qz4a62o1\_400.jpg" title="tumblr.com" rel="nofollow">You wouldn't download a car!</a> [tumblr.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You would n't download a car !
[ tumblr.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You wouldn't download a car!
[tumblr.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260712860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!"</p></div><p>Don't worry, they'll simply sue ten thousand people for a million dollars each to get their money back.  They may need a government bailout in the meantime.  Nearly every single one of your elected officials have enjoyed soft money from the MPAA to ensure that everyone rolls over and sits when the MPAA instructs them to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We could have made 20 Billion if it were n't for all of those pirates !
" Do n't worry , they 'll simply sue ten thousand people for a million dollars each to get their money back .
They may need a government bailout in the meantime .
Nearly every single one of your elected officials have enjoyed soft money from the MPAA to ensure that everyone rolls over and sits when the MPAA instructs them to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!
"Don't worry, they'll simply sue ten thousand people for a million dollars each to get their money back.
They may need a government bailout in the meantime.
Nearly every single one of your elected officials have enjoyed soft money from the MPAA to ensure that everyone rolls over and sits when the MPAA instructs them to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672</id>
	<title>10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260712500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.<br>We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427668</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Captain Spam</author>
	<datestamp>1260722040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Okay.  Look, sure, it IS record-setting revenues.  But that's just going to bolster the pirate community to pirate us HARDER next year!  So come on!  We need more laws!  I swear, ONE of these years we'll be right!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Okay .
Look , sure , it IS record-setting revenues .
But that 's just going to bolster the pirate community to pirate us HARDER next year !
So come on !
We need more laws !
I swear , ONE of these years we 'll be right !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Okay.
Look, sure, it IS record-setting revenues.
But that's just going to bolster the pirate community to pirate us HARDER next year!
So come on!
We need more laws!
I swear, ONE of these years we'll be right!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428542</id>
	<title>Michael Bay should direct this...</title>
	<author>incognito84</author>
	<datestamp>1260733680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love how Hollywood just sends Michael Bay out with the single mission to fill cinemas.
<br>
<br>
If Hollywood really just wanted to make a quick buck, they'd just throw together a trailer full of tidal waves, nuclear bomb test footage, explosions, robots, Michael Bay's name, then release the obligatory blockbuster movie trailer with such delightful quips as: "in a world... explosion... awesome... teenage cleavage... het-er-o-sex-u-al... stuff you liked when you were twelve..."
<br>
<br>
It doesn't even matter if there is an actual movie. It will make BILLIONS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how Hollywood just sends Michael Bay out with the single mission to fill cinemas .
If Hollywood really just wanted to make a quick buck , they 'd just throw together a trailer full of tidal waves , nuclear bomb test footage , explosions , robots , Michael Bay 's name , then release the obligatory blockbuster movie trailer with such delightful quips as : " in a world... explosion... awesome... teenage cleavage... het-er-o-sex-u-al... stuff you liked when you were twelve... " It does n't even matter if there is an actual movie .
It will make BILLIONS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how Hollywood just sends Michael Bay out with the single mission to fill cinemas.
If Hollywood really just wanted to make a quick buck, they'd just throw together a trailer full of tidal waves, nuclear bomb test footage, explosions, robots, Michael Bay's name, then release the obligatory blockbuster movie trailer with such delightful quips as: "in a world... explosion... awesome... teenage cleavage... het-er-o-sex-u-al... stuff you liked when you were twelve..."


It doesn't even matter if there is an actual movie.
It will make BILLIONS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428250</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260728940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>To quote the past "It's the economy, stupid"

In a troubled economic times, it's been noted that people tend to go to the movies more than in good times.  Not saying that accounts for all the increased receipts --but it probably has a lot do with it --especially when the tally is about box-office receipts.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To quote the past " It 's the economy , stupid " In a troubled economic times , it 's been noted that people tend to go to the movies more than in good times .
Not saying that accounts for all the increased receipts --but it probably has a lot do with it --especially when the tally is about box-office receipts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To quote the past "It's the economy, stupid"

In a troubled economic times, it's been noted that people tend to go to the movies more than in good times.
Not saying that accounts for all the increased receipts --but it probably has a lot do with it --especially when the tally is about box-office receipts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434590</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260823620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>fewer</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>fewer</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fewer</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429402</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Caue</author>
	<datestamp>1260790920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>nor costs. Revenue is great and all but how much was spent and what's the rentability? pertinent questions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>nor costs .
Revenue is great and all but how much was spent and what 's the rentability ?
pertinent questions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nor costs.
Revenue is great and all but how much was spent and what's the rentability?
pertinent questions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427678</id>
	<title>Simple</title>
	<author>sunfly</author>
	<datestamp>1260722220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make good products, people buy them.  Simple really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make good products , people buy them .
Simple really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make good products, people buy them.
Simple really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430720</id>
	<title>Re:HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC!!!!</title>
	<author>xOneca</author>
	<datestamp>1260804840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait, wait. One moment. Sony, the big producer, is worrying about home taping that's killing music <strong>and</strong> Sony, the big manufacturer, is (was) selling double plate recording devices? I will never understand this...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-S</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait , wait .
One moment .
Sony , the big producer , is worrying about home taping that 's killing music and Sony , the big manufacturer , is ( was ) selling double plate recording devices ?
I will never understand this... : -S</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait, wait.
One moment.
Sony, the big producer, is worrying about home taping that's killing music and Sony, the big manufacturer, is (was) selling double plate recording devices?
I will never understand this... :-S</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428092</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260726900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US."</p><p>This the same logic that said vhs would hurt box office movies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US .
" This the same logic that said vhs would hurt box office movies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.
"This the same logic that said vhs would hurt box office movies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431814</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1260809820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and yes, that's the way it should be.</p><p>Who would these anti-anti-piracy ads appeal to? Telling people to stop watching movies they want to watch? Or political activism to get people to lobby TPTB to create another "czar" to regulate more things?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and yes , that 's the way it should be.Who would these anti-anti-piracy ads appeal to ?
Telling people to stop watching movies they want to watch ?
Or political activism to get people to lobby TPTB to create another " czar " to regulate more things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and yes, that's the way it should be.Who would these anti-anti-piracy ads appeal to?
Telling people to stop watching movies they want to watch?
Or political activism to get people to lobby TPTB to create another "czar" to regulate more things?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430824</id>
	<title>Re:Big Suprise!</title>
	<author>xOneca</author>
	<datestamp>1260805260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Me too. Poor producers... only $10 billion... You bastard downloaders!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Me too .
Poor producers... only $ 10 billion... You bastard downloaders !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Me too.
Poor producers... only $10 billion... You bastard downloaders!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</id>
	<title>Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1260713640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think its been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to a movie and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to movies.  The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content, well, that's been lame since TV was invented and it gets lamer every year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think its been maybe 10 years since I 've actually gone to a movie and I 'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to movies .
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content , well , that 's been lame since TV was invented and it gets lamer every year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think its been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to a movie and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to movies.
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content, well, that's been lame since TV was invented and it gets lamer every year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426862</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260714180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where Can I buy an IMAX setup, since you seem to have one, judging from your comment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where Can I buy an IMAX setup , since you seem to have one , judging from your comment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where Can I buy an IMAX setup, since you seem to have one, judging from your comment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427332</id>
	<title>Its what profits \_could\_ have been made.</title>
	<author>mjensen</author>
	<datestamp>1260718140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the talk will be "It would have been better without piracy", which would unfortunately be correct....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the talk will be " It would have been better without piracy " , which would unfortunately be correct... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the talk will be "It would have been better without piracy", which would unfortunately be correct....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428148</id>
	<title>Re:"Piracy"</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1260727560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like disney... if everything had infinite copyright, they wouldn't be able to rehash it for toddlers and put infinite copyright on it. hypocrisy reigns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like disney... if everything had infinite copyright , they would n't be able to rehash it for toddlers and put infinite copyright on it .
hypocrisy reigns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like disney... if everything had infinite copyright, they wouldn't be able to rehash it for toddlers and put infinite copyright on it.
hypocrisy reigns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978</id>
	<title>"Piracy"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that a lot of this "piracy" business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap. For example, one of the loudest voices against Napster (before the became "legit") was Metallica. In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums (I forget which one), they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big. So, it is OK when they commited piracy, but it isn't now when they are a target of it?

I'm glad their last album sucked....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that a lot of this " piracy " business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap .
For example , one of the loudest voices against Napster ( before the became " legit " ) was Metallica .
In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums ( I forget which one ) , they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big .
So , it is OK when they commited piracy , but it is n't now when they are a target of it ?
I 'm glad their last album sucked... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that a lot of this "piracy" business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap.
For example, one of the loudest voices against Napster (before the became "legit") was Metallica.
In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums (I forget which one), they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big.
So, it is OK when they commited piracy, but it isn't now when they are a target of it?
I'm glad their last album sucked....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427298</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>wtbname</author>
	<datestamp>1260717840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So...</p><p>What you are saying is that instead after the most movies made ever, and the most profit ever, the evil movie pirates are destroying their busniess STILL, based on your rigorous statistical analysis and totally out of line reference to the horrible disease, AIDS.</p><p>???</p><p>Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So...What you are saying is that instead after the most movies made ever , and the most profit ever , the evil movie pirates are destroying their busniess STILL , based on your rigorous statistical analysis and totally out of line reference to the horrible disease , AIDS. ? ?
? Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So...What you are saying is that instead after the most movies made ever, and the most profit ever, the evil movie pirates are destroying their busniess STILL, based on your rigorous statistical analysis and totally out of line reference to the horrible disease, AIDS.??
?Profit!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426872</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Ceiynt</author>
	<datestamp>1260714240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you never been to a store around this time of year and looked at the DVD sections? That is one of the first sections that get destroyed by the soccer moms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you never been to a store around this time of year and looked at the DVD sections ?
That is one of the first sections that get destroyed by the soccer moms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you never been to a store around this time of year and looked at the DVD sections?
That is one of the first sections that get destroyed by the soccer moms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428480</id>
	<title>Re:Hollywood Traditionally Does Well In Recessions</title>
	<author>definate</author>
	<datestamp>1260732540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because Hollywood produces <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferior\_good" title="wikipedia.org">inferior goods</a> [wikipedia.org]. A double entendre if ever I've heard one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because Hollywood produces inferior goods [ wikipedia.org ] .
A double entendre if ever I 've heard one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because Hollywood produces inferior goods [wikipedia.org].
A double entendre if ever I've heard one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428982</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1260783540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blame the MPAA, they are the ones who want us to believe gross revenue is a meaningful measure of film success.</p><p>They are all too happy to crow about the latest crappy film making record gross which of course has nothing to do with the fact that ticket prices have doubled in the past 10 years.</p><p>If they want to use gross numbers to inflate their success, I think it's fair game to use the same numbers to call them on their BS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blame the MPAA , they are the ones who want us to believe gross revenue is a meaningful measure of film success.They are all too happy to crow about the latest crappy film making record gross which of course has nothing to do with the fact that ticket prices have doubled in the past 10 years.If they want to use gross numbers to inflate their success , I think it 's fair game to use the same numbers to call them on their BS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blame the MPAA, they are the ones who want us to believe gross revenue is a meaningful measure of film success.They are all too happy to crow about the latest crappy film making record gross which of course has nothing to do with the fact that ticket prices have doubled in the past 10 years.If they want to use gross numbers to inflate their success, I think it's fair game to use the same numbers to call them on their BS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427044</id>
	<title>Re:Adjusted for Gold-based inflation...</title>
	<author>PIBM</author>
	<datestamp>1260715620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gold value skyrocket while there are recession. In 2009, the gold price went up around 25\% (in USD) while there`s been a general deflation of the US market. You should use the inflation, which takes into account much more different values to compare year to year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gold value skyrocket while there are recession .
In 2009 , the gold price went up around 25 \ % ( in USD ) while there ` s been a general deflation of the US market .
You should use the inflation , which takes into account much more different values to compare year to year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gold value skyrocket while there are recession.
In 2009, the gold price went up around 25\% (in USD) while there`s been a general deflation of the US market.
You should use the inflation, which takes into account much more different values to compare year to year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427030</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>operator\_error</author>
	<datestamp>1260715500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think its been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to a movie<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content, well, that's been lame since...</p></div><p>People have 'dates' with others every now and then, and the cinema is a nice place to go during the process. In fact the cinema can turn dating from a potentially-stressful process into a more relaxed, passive and entertaining process. It can even provide something worth discussing afterwards.</p><p>During these 'dates' ambiance is a valuable quality, so perhaps dinner in a restaurant and a film at the cinema trumps what the basement-media-room affords. At least as an alternative for some folks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think its been maybe 10 years since I 've actually gone to a movie ... The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content , well , that 's been lame since...People have 'dates ' with others every now and then , and the cinema is a nice place to go during the process .
In fact the cinema can turn dating from a potentially-stressful process into a more relaxed , passive and entertaining process .
It can even provide something worth discussing afterwards.During these 'dates ' ambiance is a valuable quality , so perhaps dinner in a restaurant and a film at the cinema trumps what the basement-media-room affords .
At least as an alternative for some folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think its been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to a movie ...  The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get video content, well, that's been lame since...People have 'dates' with others every now and then, and the cinema is a nice place to go during the process.
In fact the cinema can turn dating from a potentially-stressful process into a more relaxed, passive and entertaining process.
It can even provide something worth discussing afterwards.During these 'dates' ambiance is a valuable quality, so perhaps dinner in a restaurant and a film at the cinema trumps what the basement-media-room affords.
At least as an alternative for some folks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30436604</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1260790380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works. Were it not, they would have produced LESS each year.</i></p><p>I believe you meant "fewer", but semantics aside, not all growth is healthy growth.  Many industries exhibit growth right up to the point where they collapse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works .
Were it not , they would have produced LESS each year.I believe you meant " fewer " , but semantics aside , not all growth is healthy growth .
Many industries exhibit growth right up to the point where they collapse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works.
Were it not, they would have produced LESS each year.I believe you meant "fewer", but semantics aside, not all growth is healthy growth.
Many industries exhibit growth right up to the point where they collapse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30435388</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260784680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awesome, thanks for making my life of piracy possible.  Without paying shomes like you, what would the rest of us do?</p><p>Pay for media?</p><p>ROFL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome , thanks for making my life of piracy possible .
Without paying shomes like you , what would the rest of us do ? Pay for media ? ROFL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome, thanks for making my life of piracy possible.
Without paying shomes like you, what would the rest of us do?Pay for media?ROFL</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428164</id>
	<title>Inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260727680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are those record receipts adjusted for inflation, or is this bad, sensational reporting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are those record receipts adjusted for inflation , or is this bad , sensational reporting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are those record receipts adjusted for inflation, or is this bad, sensational reporting?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</id>
	<title>Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260712020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and doing things with them.  Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my family.  Because thieves steal my work online."  <br> <br>

Someone should make an anti-anti-piracy ad with the same exact thing except when they look up they say, "I can't feed my family<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... because even though my employer posts record revenues, the justice system makes <b>you</b> are a perfectly legitimate scapegoat."  <br> <br>

Odds that the profits from this revenue make it back to the people who genuinely need it to keep the system healthy?  Slim to none.  Executive producer gets more executive while life risking stunt double gets poorer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double , key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families , eating and doing things with them .
Then they would look up and say something to effect of , " I ca n't feed my family .
Because thieves steal my work online .
" Someone should make an anti-anti-piracy ad with the same exact thing except when they look up they say , " I ca n't feed my family ... because even though my employer posts record revenues , the justice system makes you are a perfectly legitimate scapegoat .
" Odds that the profits from this revenue make it back to the people who genuinely need it to keep the system healthy ?
Slim to none .
Executive producer gets more executive while life risking stunt double gets poorer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and doing things with them.
Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my family.
Because thieves steal my work online.
"   

Someone should make an anti-anti-piracy ad with the same exact thing except when they look up they say, "I can't feed my family ... because even though my employer posts record revenues, the justice system makes you are a perfectly legitimate scapegoat.
"   

Odds that the profits from this revenue make it back to the people who genuinely need it to keep the system healthy?
Slim to none.
Executive producer gets more executive while life risking stunt double gets poorer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427078</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1260715860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my<br>&gt; family."</p><p>And you believed it.  Sucker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Then they would look up and say something to effect of , " I ca n't feed my &gt; family .
" And you believed it .
Sucker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Then they would look up and say something to effect of, "I can't feed my&gt; family.
"And you believed it.
Sucker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429856</id>
	<title>television was supposed to kill the movie house</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1260798120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's when we got the new aspect ratios in the theatre, to get movies to stand out from television in the 1950s</p><p>then the vcr was supposed to kill the movie house. of course, the vcr/ dvd market eventually turned into a huge cash cow for the studios</p><p>and the now internet is supposed to kill the movie house</p><p>i call bullshit. with all of the cell phones and crying babies, the movie house is still going to rake in the cash. for many reasons, not least of which movies are actually better when viewed in a group (the gasps, the shrieks, the laughter, the shared experience: it heightens your enjoyment)</p><p>and now they are rolling out imax and 3D to stand apart from home theatre set ups (even though it seems home theatre set ups are now poised to get 3D). but even if they didn't do that, i have no fear that the movie house is never going to go extinct, no matter what happens in the technology/ legal landscape surrounding movie media. even if they released movies for free online at the same time as they did in theatres (not that i think that is ever going to happen) i still think movie house will rake in the dough</p><p>when you pay for a movie house ticket, you paying for, and receiving more, than just a movie: you are getting something psychologically akin to going to church in terms of being part of a community, and that means something that means the movie house will be with us for centuries</p><p>heck, sitting here near broadway in manhattan: the medium shakespeare worked in, live performance on a stage, is still alive and going gangbusters as well</p><p>but you always hear these weird simpsons comic book guy type assholes here on slashdot saying in high holy indignation that they'll never NEVER go to a movie house again because of popcorn prices/ rude people/ etc. of course, they're probably going to a movie house next week in spite of their haughty declarations, but even if they aren't ever going to a movie house again, this population of people is extremely small (however loud they are on slashdot) so they don't mean anything, there's always oddly acclimated types</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's when we got the new aspect ratios in the theatre , to get movies to stand out from television in the 1950sthen the vcr was supposed to kill the movie house .
of course , the vcr/ dvd market eventually turned into a huge cash cow for the studiosand the now internet is supposed to kill the movie housei call bullshit .
with all of the cell phones and crying babies , the movie house is still going to rake in the cash .
for many reasons , not least of which movies are actually better when viewed in a group ( the gasps , the shrieks , the laughter , the shared experience : it heightens your enjoyment ) and now they are rolling out imax and 3D to stand apart from home theatre set ups ( even though it seems home theatre set ups are now poised to get 3D ) .
but even if they did n't do that , i have no fear that the movie house is never going to go extinct , no matter what happens in the technology/ legal landscape surrounding movie media .
even if they released movies for free online at the same time as they did in theatres ( not that i think that is ever going to happen ) i still think movie house will rake in the doughwhen you pay for a movie house ticket , you paying for , and receiving more , than just a movie : you are getting something psychologically akin to going to church in terms of being part of a community , and that means something that means the movie house will be with us for centuriesheck , sitting here near broadway in manhattan : the medium shakespeare worked in , live performance on a stage , is still alive and going gangbusters as wellbut you always hear these weird simpsons comic book guy type assholes here on slashdot saying in high holy indignation that they 'll never NEVER go to a movie house again because of popcorn prices/ rude people/ etc .
of course , they 're probably going to a movie house next week in spite of their haughty declarations , but even if they are n't ever going to a movie house again , this population of people is extremely small ( however loud they are on slashdot ) so they do n't mean anything , there 's always oddly acclimated types</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's when we got the new aspect ratios in the theatre, to get movies to stand out from television in the 1950sthen the vcr was supposed to kill the movie house.
of course, the vcr/ dvd market eventually turned into a huge cash cow for the studiosand the now internet is supposed to kill the movie housei call bullshit.
with all of the cell phones and crying babies, the movie house is still going to rake in the cash.
for many reasons, not least of which movies are actually better when viewed in a group (the gasps, the shrieks, the laughter, the shared experience: it heightens your enjoyment)and now they are rolling out imax and 3D to stand apart from home theatre set ups (even though it seems home theatre set ups are now poised to get 3D).
but even if they didn't do that, i have no fear that the movie house is never going to go extinct, no matter what happens in the technology/ legal landscape surrounding movie media.
even if they released movies for free online at the same time as they did in theatres (not that i think that is ever going to happen) i still think movie house will rake in the doughwhen you pay for a movie house ticket, you paying for, and receiving more, than just a movie: you are getting something psychologically akin to going to church in terms of being part of a community, and that means something that means the movie house will be with us for centuriesheck, sitting here near broadway in manhattan: the medium shakespeare worked in, live performance on a stage, is still alive and going gangbusters as wellbut you always hear these weird simpsons comic book guy type assholes here on slashdot saying in high holy indignation that they'll never NEVER go to a movie house again because of popcorn prices/ rude people/ etc.
of course, they're probably going to a movie house next week in spite of their haughty declarations, but even if they aren't ever going to a movie house again, this population of people is extremely small (however loud they are on slashdot) so they don't mean anything, there's always oddly acclimated types</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426858</id>
	<title>This analysis is totally ridiculous.</title>
	<author>mmkkbb</author>
	<datestamp>1260714180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The $10 billion number is gross revenue. It does not take into effect the costs of making more movies than ever before. Never mind that making more movies means spending more money and that movie budgets are also increasing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The $ 10 billion number is gross revenue .
It does not take into effect the costs of making more movies than ever before .
Never mind that making more movies means spending more money and that movie budgets are also increasing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The $10 billion number is gross revenue.
It does not take into effect the costs of making more movies than ever before.
Never mind that making more movies means spending more money and that movie budgets are also increasing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260712140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inflation would need to be nearly 10\% for Hollywood to not have higher inflation adjusted revenues this year than last year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inflation would need to be nearly 10 \ % for Hollywood to not have higher inflation adjusted revenues this year than last year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inflation would need to be nearly 10\% for Hollywood to not have higher inflation adjusted revenues this year than last year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427790</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260723300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In your chart there, I see about 2500 growth every 10 years with very little variation.  It's a little trippy to think it quintupled in 30 years actually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In your chart there , I see about 2500 growth every 10 years with very little variation .
It 's a little trippy to think it quintupled in 30 years actually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In your chart there, I see about 2500 growth every 10 years with very little variation.
It's a little trippy to think it quintupled in 30 years actually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427924</id>
	<title>A scary realization</title>
	<author>jsac</author>
	<datestamp>1260724800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft routinely grosses more than Hollywood does at the domestic box office.</p><p>Hmm, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison because that's Microsoft's international gross income compared to Hollywood's domestic income. But still<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I thought it somewhat eye-popping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft routinely grosses more than Hollywood does at the domestic box office.Hmm , that 's an apples-to-oranges comparison because that 's Microsoft 's international gross income compared to Hollywood 's domestic income .
But still ... I thought it somewhat eye-popping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft routinely grosses more than Hollywood does at the domestic box office.Hmm, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison because that's Microsoft's international gross income compared to Hollywood's domestic income.
But still ... I thought it somewhat eye-popping.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>For a while I have been arguing that the debate should not be framed in the "innovator versus freeloader" view but in a "constitutional rights and individual property rights versus expansive intellectual property" view.

Most Americans do not accept the idea that you have a right to give away a copy of a song to anyone who wants it. While we hear constantly about those numbers that "40\% of internet users said they saw nothing wrong with pirating music" we cannot go by that. Americans are just like any other people; when we think we can get away with something that doesn't seem to directly hurt someone we do it. Downloading bootlegs doesn't seem to hurt anyone, but it can.

If I had bootlegged the entire new Android Lust album instead of buying it on iTunes I would have not sent the chick behind AL any money. iTunes allowed me to send her maybe $2 for the album which I paid $10, probably a good $5 less than what I would have paid for a CD copy.

We need to stress to the government that iTunes, not more legislation, is the key to getting the system working. We need to show them that bands like Metallica refuse to do their part because they want an all or nothing. Buy 20-30 songs on iTunes and you give Apple more ammo to counter the claims that piracy has no solution. They can just shrug in front of Congress and say "it's not our side, the legal downloading side, that has dropped the ball. They refuse to let people buy their tracks one by one because they want them to buy them all or nothing."

There will always be politicians who will rail against piracy and ignore iTunes and other legal services, but many politicians will just look at these industries and say "the mechanisms are in place, why aren't you being a team player, why are you coming to us for help when there are companies dying to make the market work for you?" Politicans tend to be lazy, just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years. Something like 1000 or more a year according to Fox News.

We can appeal to the public by pointing out the supremacy of the 1st amendment over Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The first amendment was ratified later so it supercedes everything in the original constitution, just as all parts of the constitution must be read in the context of the Bill of Rights.

We should also point out how anti-backup provisions and attitudes like Jack Valenti's "if you want a backup, buy another copy" are against common sense, American tradition and capitalist principles. I have yet to read of a prominent capitalist theorist who would support the DMCA. Rand, Ricardo, Hayek and Smith are probably spinning in their graves over the DMCA and similar "seller protection legislation."

The hollywood position is built on pure, unprincipled greed. Defeating it only means that we need to be consistant and show the public where the law is going to start biting them in the ass if they don't care now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a while I have been arguing that the debate should not be framed in the " innovator versus freeloader " view but in a " constitutional rights and individual property rights versus expansive intellectual property " view .
Most Americans do not accept the idea that you have a right to give away a copy of a song to anyone who wants it .
While we hear constantly about those numbers that " 40 \ % of internet users said they saw nothing wrong with pirating music " we can not go by that .
Americans are just like any other people ; when we think we can get away with something that does n't seem to directly hurt someone we do it .
Downloading bootlegs does n't seem to hurt anyone , but it can .
If I had bootlegged the entire new Android Lust album instead of buying it on iTunes I would have not sent the chick behind AL any money .
iTunes allowed me to send her maybe $ 2 for the album which I paid $ 10 , probably a good $ 5 less than what I would have paid for a CD copy .
We need to stress to the government that iTunes , not more legislation , is the key to getting the system working .
We need to show them that bands like Metallica refuse to do their part because they want an all or nothing .
Buy 20-30 songs on iTunes and you give Apple more ammo to counter the claims that piracy has no solution .
They can just shrug in front of Congress and say " it 's not our side , the legal downloading side , that has dropped the ball .
They refuse to let people buy their tracks one by one because they want them to buy them all or nothing .
" There will always be politicians who will rail against piracy and ignore iTunes and other legal services , but many politicians will just look at these industries and say " the mechanisms are in place , why are n't you being a team player , why are you coming to us for help when there are companies dying to make the market work for you ?
" Politicans tend to be lazy , just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years .
Something like 1000 or more a year according to Fox News .
We can appeal to the public by pointing out the supremacy of the 1st amendment over Article I , Section 8 , Clause 3 .
The first amendment was ratified later so it supercedes everything in the original constitution , just as all parts of the constitution must be read in the context of the Bill of Rights .
We should also point out how anti-backup provisions and attitudes like Jack Valenti 's " if you want a backup , buy another copy " are against common sense , American tradition and capitalist principles .
I have yet to read of a prominent capitalist theorist who would support the DMCA .
Rand , Ricardo , Hayek and Smith are probably spinning in their graves over the DMCA and similar " seller protection legislation .
" The hollywood position is built on pure , unprincipled greed .
Defeating it only means that we need to be consistant and show the public where the law is going to start biting them in the ass if they do n't care now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a while I have been arguing that the debate should not be framed in the "innovator versus freeloader" view but in a "constitutional rights and individual property rights versus expansive intellectual property" view.
Most Americans do not accept the idea that you have a right to give away a copy of a song to anyone who wants it.
While we hear constantly about those numbers that "40\% of internet users said they saw nothing wrong with pirating music" we cannot go by that.
Americans are just like any other people; when we think we can get away with something that doesn't seem to directly hurt someone we do it.
Downloading bootlegs doesn't seem to hurt anyone, but it can.
If I had bootlegged the entire new Android Lust album instead of buying it on iTunes I would have not sent the chick behind AL any money.
iTunes allowed me to send her maybe $2 for the album which I paid $10, probably a good $5 less than what I would have paid for a CD copy.
We need to stress to the government that iTunes, not more legislation, is the key to getting the system working.
We need to show them that bands like Metallica refuse to do their part because they want an all or nothing.
Buy 20-30 songs on iTunes and you give Apple more ammo to counter the claims that piracy has no solution.
They can just shrug in front of Congress and say "it's not our side, the legal downloading side, that has dropped the ball.
They refuse to let people buy their tracks one by one because they want them to buy them all or nothing.
"

There will always be politicians who will rail against piracy and ignore iTunes and other legal services, but many politicians will just look at these industries and say "the mechanisms are in place, why aren't you being a team player, why are you coming to us for help when there are companies dying to make the market work for you?
" Politicans tend to be lazy, just look at how many Senate votes that John Kerry has missed in the past 12 years.
Something like 1000 or more a year according to Fox News.
We can appeal to the public by pointing out the supremacy of the 1st amendment over Article I, Section 8, Clause 3.
The first amendment was ratified later so it supercedes everything in the original constitution, just as all parts of the constitution must be read in the context of the Bill of Rights.
We should also point out how anti-backup provisions and attitudes like Jack Valenti's "if you want a backup, buy another copy" are against common sense, American tradition and capitalist principles.
I have yet to read of a prominent capitalist theorist who would support the DMCA.
Rand, Ricardo, Hayek and Smith are probably spinning in their graves over the DMCA and similar "seller protection legislation.
"

The hollywood position is built on pure, unprincipled greed.
Defeating it only means that we need to be consistant and show the public where the law is going to start biting them in the ass if they don't care now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427472</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>RobVB</author>
	<datestamp>1260719640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.</p></div><p>I've seen what happens when websites become fans of the pro-ninja spin. It's not pretty either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish Slashdot was n't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.I 've seen what happens when websites become fans of the pro-ninja spin .
It 's not pretty either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.I've seen what happens when websites become fans of the pro-ninja spin.
It's not pretty either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434696</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>EpsCylonB</author>
	<datestamp>1260824220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hard money is contributions that are open, legal and easy to trace</p><p>soft money is given to politicians or organisations in a clandestine, untraceable way, it may or may not be illegal depending on the situation</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hard money is contributions that are open , legal and easy to tracesoft money is given to politicians or organisations in a clandestine , untraceable way , it may or may not be illegal depending on the situation</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hard money is contributions that are open, legal and easy to tracesoft money is given to politicians or organisations in a clandestine, untraceable way, it may or may not be illegal depending on the situation</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427390</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>hansamurai</author>
	<datestamp>1260718680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or simply ticket stubs sold?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or simply ticket stubs sold ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or simply ticket stubs sold?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700</id>
	<title>Re:10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>arb phd slp</author>
	<datestamp>1260712800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.<br>We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.</p></div><p>My wife loved the new Star Trek and she wouldn't be caught dead going to Twilight. Sucks to be you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.My wife loved the new Star Trek and she would n't be caught dead going to Twilight .
Sucks to be you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which the inner geek in me embraces Star Trek but oddly the girlfriend would not go with me to the theater to see so I got it on dvd.We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.My wife loved the new Star Trek and she wouldn't be caught dead going to Twilight.
Sucks to be you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427082</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!"</p></div><p>And it's okay to take away 10 billion in income??? The only reason for the increase are higher ticket prices. Ticket sales have been falling for a few years now inspite of a growing population. Also comparing ticket sales isn't accurate it mainly hurts DVD and other sources. Those sales have slowed considerably in recent years. There seems to be two consistent arguments, "Hollywood is just plain greedy" and "downloaders wouldn't have bought in the first place". Both arguments are inaccurate. Hollywood is a business and businesses make profits or they die, period. Oil companies and drug companies dwarf Hollywood profits. Microsoft alone is bigger than the entire US film industry. One company! Also the argument that downloaders never buy is silly. Did they simply not buy or watch films before downloading got popular? What cave were they hiding in before torrents? With all the earth shaking problems we face it is mind numbing that the single biggest issue seems to be free movies, music, and games. Oddly enough that's my lowest priority. It's rare that a day goes by when there aren't two or three posts on Slashdot on this very subject and I've seen more posts in a day. There just seems to be better uses for our time than making the same arguments day after day. I think EVERY post should be marked redundant unless they truly make an original statement because it's all been covered before. And yes I know some one will think it's cute to mark this post as redundant. It's why I only post such things AC.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We could have made 20 Billion if it were n't for all of those pirates !
" And it 's okay to take away 10 billion in income ? ? ?
The only reason for the increase are higher ticket prices .
Ticket sales have been falling for a few years now inspite of a growing population .
Also comparing ticket sales is n't accurate it mainly hurts DVD and other sources .
Those sales have slowed considerably in recent years .
There seems to be two consistent arguments , " Hollywood is just plain greedy " and " downloaders would n't have bought in the first place " .
Both arguments are inaccurate .
Hollywood is a business and businesses make profits or they die , period .
Oil companies and drug companies dwarf Hollywood profits .
Microsoft alone is bigger than the entire US film industry .
One company !
Also the argument that downloaders never buy is silly .
Did they simply not buy or watch films before downloading got popular ?
What cave were they hiding in before torrents ?
With all the earth shaking problems we face it is mind numbing that the single biggest issue seems to be free movies , music , and games .
Oddly enough that 's my lowest priority .
It 's rare that a day goes by when there are n't two or three posts on Slashdot on this very subject and I 've seen more posts in a day .
There just seems to be better uses for our time than making the same arguments day after day .
I think EVERY post should be marked redundant unless they truly make an original statement because it 's all been covered before .
And yes I know some one will think it 's cute to mark this post as redundant .
It 's why I only post such things AC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!
"And it's okay to take away 10 billion in income???
The only reason for the increase are higher ticket prices.
Ticket sales have been falling for a few years now inspite of a growing population.
Also comparing ticket sales isn't accurate it mainly hurts DVD and other sources.
Those sales have slowed considerably in recent years.
There seems to be two consistent arguments, "Hollywood is just plain greedy" and "downloaders wouldn't have bought in the first place".
Both arguments are inaccurate.
Hollywood is a business and businesses make profits or they die, period.
Oil companies and drug companies dwarf Hollywood profits.
Microsoft alone is bigger than the entire US film industry.
One company!
Also the argument that downloaders never buy is silly.
Did they simply not buy or watch films before downloading got popular?
What cave were they hiding in before torrents?
With all the earth shaking problems we face it is mind numbing that the single biggest issue seems to be free movies, music, and games.
Oddly enough that's my lowest priority.
It's rare that a day goes by when there aren't two or three posts on Slashdot on this very subject and I've seen more posts in a day.
There just seems to be better uses for our time than making the same arguments day after day.
I think EVERY post should be marked redundant unless they truly make an original statement because it's all been covered before.
And yes I know some one will think it's cute to mark this post as redundant.
It's why I only post such things AC.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427866</id>
	<title>Re:And in other news...</title>
	<author>Spad</author>
	<datestamp>1260724200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who said anything about it being beneficial? That's a rather piss-poor strawman.</p><p>The argument is that despite Hollywood decrying piracy as being be downfall of the movie industry, that they were losing money hand over fist, that ordinary people in the industry were losing their jobs left, right and centre because of it, that the entire economy of America was in danger because of these dangerous pirates, who were probably also funding international terrorism and all paedophiles as well, they've somehow managed to make record profits during a substantial recession.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who said anything about it being beneficial ?
That 's a rather piss-poor strawman.The argument is that despite Hollywood decrying piracy as being be downfall of the movie industry , that they were losing money hand over fist , that ordinary people in the industry were losing their jobs left , right and centre because of it , that the entire economy of America was in danger because of these dangerous pirates , who were probably also funding international terrorism and all paedophiles as well , they 've somehow managed to make record profits during a substantial recession .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who said anything about it being beneficial?
That's a rather piss-poor strawman.The argument is that despite Hollywood decrying piracy as being be downfall of the movie industry, that they were losing money hand over fist, that ordinary people in the industry were losing their jobs left, right and centre because of it, that the entire economy of America was in danger because of these dangerous pirates, who were probably also funding international terrorism and all paedophiles as well, they've somehow managed to make record profits during a substantial recession.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427688</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1260722280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The question is what were average ticket prices last year vs average ticket prices this year?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The question is what were average ticket prices last year vs average ticket prices this year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The question is what were average ticket prices last year vs average ticket prices this year?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426710</id>
	<title>Buying slavery, one movie ticket at a time.</title>
	<author>sehlat</author>
	<datestamp>1260712860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or does anybody really believe that NONE of that money gets given as "campaign contributions", salaries for "lobbyists", ACTA negotiators, dinner with politicians, or other persuasive measures?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or does anybody really believe that NONE of that money gets given as " campaign contributions " , salaries for " lobbyists " , ACTA negotiators , dinner with politicians , or other persuasive measures ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or does anybody really believe that NONE of that money gets given as "campaign contributions", salaries for "lobbyists", ACTA negotiators, dinner with politicians, or other persuasive measures?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428294</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>Jay Clay</author>
	<datestamp>1260729600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to see live music and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go see live music.  The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get audio content, well, that's been lame since radio was invented and it gets lamer every year.</p><p>I think it's been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to the beach and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to the beach.  The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to go swimming, well, that's been lame since pools were invented and it gets lamer every year.</p><p>(insert another example of technically receiving info while ignoring the experience of it ad infinitum)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's been maybe 10 years since I 've actually gone to see live music and I 'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go see live music .
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get audio content , well , that 's been lame since radio was invented and it gets lamer every year.I think it 's been maybe 10 years since I 've actually gone to the beach and I 'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to the beach .
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to go swimming , well , that 's been lame since pools were invented and it gets lamer every year .
( insert another example of technically receiving info while ignoring the experience of it ad infinitum )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to see live music and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go see live music.
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to get audio content, well, that's been lame since radio was invented and it gets lamer every year.I think it's been maybe 10 years since I've actually gone to the beach and I'm just drawing a blank as to why anyone else actually does go to the beach.
The whole idea of having to travel somewhere to go swimming, well, that's been lame since pools were invented and it gets lamer every year.
(insert another example of technically receiving info while ignoring the experience of it ad infinitum)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426950</id>
	<title>Litigation *is* the business model.</title>
	<author>d18c7db</author>
	<datestamp>1260714780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The continued litigation by the various **AA agencies has nothing to do with protecting their revenue stream from piracy or whatever other valid sounding official excuse they use. It is simply another revenue stream. As long as they generate some income through bullying and intimidation, by abusing the law, or other dubious extorsion practices, they will continue to do so as just another way of "doing business".</htmltext>
<tokenext>The continued litigation by the various * * AA agencies has nothing to do with protecting their revenue stream from piracy or whatever other valid sounding official excuse they use .
It is simply another revenue stream .
As long as they generate some income through bullying and intimidation , by abusing the law , or other dubious extorsion practices , they will continue to do so as just another way of " doing business " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The continued litigation by the various **AA agencies has nothing to do with protecting their revenue stream from piracy or whatever other valid sounding official excuse they use.
It is simply another revenue stream.
As long as they generate some income through bullying and intimidation, by abusing the law, or other dubious extorsion practices, they will continue to do so as just another way of "doing business".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426988</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience. Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.</p></div><p>This is actually true. I saw NO MOVIES on the big screen this year due to my financial situation, but we did download a few, on NETFLIX. The same with TV Shows (Legend of the Seeker in HD). What hasnt hit NETFLIX we have DL in HD and used a streamer to go to the Xbox360 or PS3, and then if we felt it was worthy of buying we did so at AMAZON when on sale, or BESTBUY / Wal-Mart.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience .
Although the impact is far less than they claim , I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office , at least in the US.This is actually true .
I saw NO MOVIES on the big screen this year due to my financial situation , but we did download a few , on NETFLIX .
The same with TV Shows ( Legend of the Seeker in HD ) .
What hasnt hit NETFLIX we have DL in HD and used a streamer to go to the Xbox360 or PS3 , and then if we felt it was worthy of buying we did so at AMAZON when on sale , or BESTBUY / Wal-Mart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are still willing to pay to go to the movies for the superior screen/sound and crowd experience.
Although the impact is far less than they claim, I would imagine pirated movies hurt dvd sales more than box office, at least in the US.This is actually true.
I saw NO MOVIES on the big screen this year due to my financial situation, but we did download a few, on NETFLIX.
The same with TV Shows (Legend of the Seeker in HD).
What hasnt hit NETFLIX we have DL in HD and used a streamer to go to the Xbox360 or PS3, and then if we felt it was worthy of buying we did so at AMAZON when on sale, or BESTBUY / Wal-Mart.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429600</id>
	<title>Re:typical spin job</title>
	<author>Fred\_A</author>
	<datestamp>1260793920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starlets</p></div><p>If this kind of thing stopped, nobody would want to work in Hollywood.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starletsIf this kind of thing stopped , nobody would want to work in Hollywood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should stop taking two martini lunches and doing coke in the back of stretch limos with starletsIf this kind of thing stopped, nobody would want to work in Hollywood.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427522</id>
	<title>Re:10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1260720360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll give you a pass on being whipped if you got blown after seeing Twilight with her.<br>If she suggests that you read the books so she can debate them with you - and you do - then she's the one<br>with the penis ( if you're living The Crying Game, don't tell us, please ).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll give you a pass on being whipped if you got blown after seeing Twilight with her.If she suggests that you read the books so she can debate them with you - and you do - then she 's the onewith the penis ( if you 're living The Crying Game , do n't tell us , please ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll give you a pass on being whipped if you got blown after seeing Twilight with her.If she suggests that you read the books so she can debate them with you - and you do - then she's the onewith the penis ( if you're living The Crying Game, don't tell us, please ).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427294</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260717840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a pretty sweet home theater setup that cost less than $2000. Its more convenient and a much higher quality experience to watch blue-ray and dvd movies at home. I think the 12\% drop is lack of interest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a pretty sweet home theater setup that cost less than $ 2000 .
Its more convenient and a much higher quality experience to watch blue-ray and dvd movies at home .
I think the 12 \ % drop is lack of interest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a pretty sweet home theater setup that cost less than $2000.
Its more convenient and a much higher quality experience to watch blue-ray and dvd movies at home.
I think the 12\% drop is lack of interest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30436040</id>
	<title>Foreign box office</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1260787980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In 2008, Hollywood foreign box office was also around $10 billion, with Paramount, Warner Bros., Universal, Fox, Sony Pictures and Disney collecting more than $1 billion outside the US.</p><p>TV is also highly internationalized.  A show like "House" that may have 10 million viewers in the US has over 70 million viewers outside the US.</p><p>So if anyone tells you "the US doesn't export anything these days", take them to see "Avatar"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 2008 , Hollywood foreign box office was also around $ 10 billion , with Paramount , Warner Bros. , Universal , Fox , Sony Pictures and Disney collecting more than $ 1 billion outside the US.TV is also highly internationalized .
A show like " House " that may have 10 million viewers in the US has over 70 million viewers outside the US.So if anyone tells you " the US does n't export anything these days " , take them to see " Avatar " : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 2008, Hollywood foreign box office was also around $10 billion, with Paramount, Warner Bros., Universal, Fox, Sony Pictures and Disney collecting more than $1 billion outside the US.TV is also highly internationalized.
A show like "House" that may have 10 million viewers in the US has over 70 million viewers outside the US.So if anyone tells you "the US doesn't export anything these days", take them to see "Avatar" :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427546</id>
	<title>$10B in revenue and not a dime in profit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260720540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood\_accounting" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Hollywood accounting</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hollywood accounting [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hollywood accounting [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427376</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>spiffmastercow</author>
	<datestamp>1260718560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you seen the shit they put out in the last 7 years?  Small wonder...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen the shit they put out in the last 7 years ?
Small wonder.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen the shit they put out in the last 7 years?
Small wonder...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428762</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260823920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not familiar with the phrase 'soft money'... would someone explain please? thanks...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not familiar with the phrase 'soft money'... would someone explain please ?
thanks.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not familiar with the phrase 'soft money'... would someone explain please?
thanks...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431944</id>
	<title>Re:"Piracy"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260810360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think that a lot of this "piracy" business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap. For example, one of the loudest voices against Napster (before the became "legit") was Metallica. In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums (I forget which one), they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big. So, it is OK when they commited piracy, but it isn't now when they are a target of it?</p><p>I'm glad their last album sucked....</p></div><p>Just the last album?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that a lot of this " piracy " business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap .
For example , one of the loudest voices against Napster ( before the became " legit " ) was Metallica .
In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums ( I forget which one ) , they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big .
So , it is OK when they commited piracy , but it is n't now when they are a target of it ? I 'm glad their last album sucked....Just the last album ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that a lot of this "piracy" business that the MPAA and RIAA is a load of crap.
For example, one of the loudest voices against Napster (before the became "legit") was Metallica.
In one of the tape inserts for one of their albums (I forget which one), they claim outright that they used to trade tapes back and forth and copy them all the time before they made it big.
So, it is OK when they commited piracy, but it isn't now when they are a target of it?I'm glad their last album sucked....Just the last album?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431480</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>wvmarle</author>
	<datestamp>1260808620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe the stagnation of growth means the industry (finally) reaches it's saturation point, where it becomes fully mature, has captured nearly 100\% of the market, and just doesn't have room to grow? Like what happened to Microsoft about a decade ago? Still selling a lot - but just no room to sell even more, and for the market being saturated, actually starting to lose sales as soon as competition arises.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the stagnation of growth means the industry ( finally ) reaches it 's saturation point , where it becomes fully mature , has captured nearly 100 \ % of the market , and just does n't have room to grow ?
Like what happened to Microsoft about a decade ago ?
Still selling a lot - but just no room to sell even more , and for the market being saturated , actually starting to lose sales as soon as competition arises .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the stagnation of growth means the industry (finally) reaches it's saturation point, where it becomes fully mature, has captured nearly 100\% of the market, and just doesn't have room to grow?
Like what happened to Microsoft about a decade ago?
Still selling a lot - but just no room to sell even more, and for the market being saturated, actually starting to lose sales as soon as competition arises.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427142</id>
	<title>Re:Hollywood Traditionally Does Well In Recessions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260716400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't agree with that theory. I'd say that going to a movie is simply cheaper than other forms of entertainment. People want entertainment no matter what the economy or what's going on. That's why births tend to spike 9 months after a days-long power outage. Not a whole lot else to do to entertain yourself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree with that theory .
I 'd say that going to a movie is simply cheaper than other forms of entertainment .
People want entertainment no matter what the economy or what 's going on .
That 's why births tend to spike 9 months after a days-long power outage .
Not a whole lot else to do to entertain yourself ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't agree with that theory.
I'd say that going to a movie is simply cheaper than other forms of entertainment.
People want entertainment no matter what the economy or what's going on.
That's why births tend to spike 9 months after a days-long power outage.
Not a whole lot else to do to entertain yourself ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428176</id>
	<title>Re:Hollywood Traditionally Does Well In Recessions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260727920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Attending the movies is one of the more expensive forms of entertainment available, especially for a family. You can buy 2 or 3 DVD's or hire 20 or 30 for the cost of taking your family to the movies for 2 hours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Attending the movies is one of the more expensive forms of entertainment available , especially for a family .
You can buy 2 or 3 DVD 's or hire 20 or 30 for the cost of taking your family to the movies for 2 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attending the movies is one of the more expensive forms of entertainment available, especially for a family.
You can buy 2 or 3 DVD's or hire 20 or 30 for the cost of taking your family to the movies for 2 hours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</id>
	<title>Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>brit74</author>
	<datestamp>1260713640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the article:<br>
"The 2009 total was aided by a 28 cent increase in ticket prices from the year before to an average $7.46.
<br> <br>
The total number of tickets sold, or admissions, is expected to reach 1.4 billion, up from 1.34 billion in 2008. Still, that figure is not expected to break the record 1.6 billion tickets sold in 2002, said Hollywood.com Box Office."
<br> <br>
The reason for the higher revenue?  Higher ticket prices.  Ticket sales are down 12\% since 2002.  If you look at a long-term graph of ticket sales, you can see that it's been basically flat in the 2000s, compared to upper single-digit or double-digit growth nearly every year between 1970 and 2000.  It's pretty much been stagnant since 2002.
<br> <br>
Here's some numbers showing the trend:<br>
2009 - Total Gross $9,782.4<br>
2008 - Total Gross $9,630.6<br>
2007 - Total Gross $9,663.7<br>
2006 - Total Gross $9,209.5<br>
2005 - Total Gross $8,840.5<br>
2004 - Total Gross $9,380.5<br>
2003 - Total Gross $9,239.7<br>
2002 - Total Gross $9,155.0<br>
2001 - Total Gross $8,412.5<br>
2000 - Total Gross $7,661.0<br>
1990 - Total Gross $5,021.8<br>
1980 - Total Gross $2,749.0<br>
<a href="http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/" title="boxofficemojo.com" rel="nofollow">http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/</a> [boxofficemojo.com]
<br> <br>
1980-&gt;1990 = 83\% Growth in 10 years, average of 8.2\% per year<br>
1990-&gt;2002 = 82\% Growth in 12 years, average of 6.8\% per year<br>
Then, *mysteriously*, something happened around 2002:<br>
2002-&gt;2009 = 9.2\% Growth in 7 years, 1.3\% per year (using the $10 billion number, not the $9,782.4 for 2009)<br>
To put that in perspective, 1.3\% is less than the growth of inflation.
<br> <br>
In other news, the number of AIDS patients is higher than ever, and yet, the average lifespan continues to grow.  I'm sure we all can see the correlation here: AIDS = longer lifespans.  Torrent Freak spins reality even more than FOX news.  I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : " The 2009 total was aided by a 28 cent increase in ticket prices from the year before to an average $ 7.46 .
The total number of tickets sold , or admissions , is expected to reach 1.4 billion , up from 1.34 billion in 2008 .
Still , that figure is not expected to break the record 1.6 billion tickets sold in 2002 , said Hollywood.com Box Office .
" The reason for the higher revenue ?
Higher ticket prices .
Ticket sales are down 12 \ % since 2002 .
If you look at a long-term graph of ticket sales , you can see that it 's been basically flat in the 2000s , compared to upper single-digit or double-digit growth nearly every year between 1970 and 2000 .
It 's pretty much been stagnant since 2002 .
Here 's some numbers showing the trend : 2009 - Total Gross $ 9,782.4 2008 - Total Gross $ 9,630.6 2007 - Total Gross $ 9,663.7 2006 - Total Gross $ 9,209.5 2005 - Total Gross $ 8,840.5 2004 - Total Gross $ 9,380.5 2003 - Total Gross $ 9,239.7 2002 - Total Gross $ 9,155.0 2001 - Total Gross $ 8,412.5 2000 - Total Gross $ 7,661.0 1990 - Total Gross $ 5,021.8 1980 - Total Gross $ 2,749.0 http : //boxofficemojo.com/yearly/ [ boxofficemojo.com ] 1980- &gt; 1990 = 83 \ % Growth in 10 years , average of 8.2 \ % per year 1990- &gt; 2002 = 82 \ % Growth in 12 years , average of 6.8 \ % per year Then , * mysteriously * , something happened around 2002 : 2002- &gt; 2009 = 9.2 \ % Growth in 7 years , 1.3 \ % per year ( using the $ 10 billion number , not the $ 9,782.4 for 2009 ) To put that in perspective , 1.3 \ % is less than the growth of inflation .
In other news , the number of AIDS patients is higher than ever , and yet , the average lifespan continues to grow .
I 'm sure we all can see the correlation here : AIDS = longer lifespans .
Torrent Freak spins reality even more than FOX news .
I wish Slashdot was n't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:
"The 2009 total was aided by a 28 cent increase in ticket prices from the year before to an average $7.46.
The total number of tickets sold, or admissions, is expected to reach 1.4 billion, up from 1.34 billion in 2008.
Still, that figure is not expected to break the record 1.6 billion tickets sold in 2002, said Hollywood.com Box Office.
"
 
The reason for the higher revenue?
Higher ticket prices.
Ticket sales are down 12\% since 2002.
If you look at a long-term graph of ticket sales, you can see that it's been basically flat in the 2000s, compared to upper single-digit or double-digit growth nearly every year between 1970 and 2000.
It's pretty much been stagnant since 2002.
Here's some numbers showing the trend:
2009 - Total Gross $9,782.4
2008 - Total Gross $9,630.6
2007 - Total Gross $9,663.7
2006 - Total Gross $9,209.5
2005 - Total Gross $8,840.5
2004 - Total Gross $9,380.5
2003 - Total Gross $9,239.7
2002 - Total Gross $9,155.0
2001 - Total Gross $8,412.5
2000 - Total Gross $7,661.0
1990 - Total Gross $5,021.8
1980 - Total Gross $2,749.0
http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/ [boxofficemojo.com]
 
1980-&gt;1990 = 83\% Growth in 10 years, average of 8.2\% per year
1990-&gt;2002 = 82\% Growth in 12 years, average of 6.8\% per year
Then, *mysteriously*, something happened around 2002:
2002-&gt;2009 = 9.2\% Growth in 7 years, 1.3\% per year (using the $10 billion number, not the $9,782.4 for 2009)
To put that in perspective, 1.3\% is less than the growth of inflation.
In other news, the number of AIDS patients is higher than ever, and yet, the average lifespan continues to grow.
I'm sure we all can see the correlation here: AIDS = longer lifespans.
Torrent Freak spins reality even more than FOX news.
I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429290</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260789000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition. Adding value for movie studios is easy. They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies. The added value is already there. However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.</p></div></blockquote><p>Imainge if when you bought a DVD, it had no copy restrictions, it contained on it versions formatted for copying to a hard drive and for various smaller players (such as the iPhone), and instead of the "FBI WARNING: IF U STEEL THIS WE'LL COME AND GET YOU" (which only people who have <i>already paid</i> see), you saw one of the main actors saying, "Hi, this is Denzel Washington.  I realize that you could have downloaded this illegally, so I just want to express my personal thanks to you for supporting the movie industry by opting to pay for this DVD instead.  Please enjoy the show."
</p><p>Piracy would probably only go down a few percent, but you could probably sell the DVDs, but overall DVD sales would grow, because people would be happy buying a DVD, instead of feeling screwed (as I always do).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As most technical people are very aware , if I 'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available , I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition .
Adding value for movie studios is easy .
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies .
The added value is already there .
However , to add value , they need to provide an equivalent experience.Imainge if when you bought a DVD , it had no copy restrictions , it contained on it versions formatted for copying to a hard drive and for various smaller players ( such as the iPhone ) , and instead of the " FBI WARNING : IF U STEEL THIS WE 'LL COME AND GET YOU " ( which only people who have already paid see ) , you saw one of the main actors saying , " Hi , this is Denzel Washington .
I realize that you could have downloaded this illegally , so I just want to express my personal thanks to you for supporting the movie industry by opting to pay for this DVD instead .
Please enjoy the show .
" Piracy would probably only go down a few percent , but you could probably sell the DVDs , but overall DVD sales would grow , because people would be happy buying a DVD , instead of feeling screwed ( as I always do ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As most technical people are very aware, if I'm selling a product in a marketplace where a virtually identical product is available, I need to add value in order to get people to purchase through me instead of the competition.
Adding value for movie studios is easy.
They are selling legal copies and supporting the people who made the movies.
The added value is already there.
However, to add value, they need to provide an equivalent experience.Imainge if when you bought a DVD, it had no copy restrictions, it contained on it versions formatted for copying to a hard drive and for various smaller players (such as the iPhone), and instead of the "FBI WARNING: IF U STEEL THIS WE'LL COME AND GET YOU" (which only people who have already paid see), you saw one of the main actors saying, "Hi, this is Denzel Washington.
I realize that you could have downloaded this illegally, so I just want to express my personal thanks to you for supporting the movie industry by opting to pay for this DVD instead.
Please enjoy the show.
"
Piracy would probably only go down a few percent, but you could probably sell the DVDs, but overall DVD sales would grow, because people would be happy buying a DVD, instead of feeling screwed (as I always do).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427834</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1260723780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By superior do you mean "volume's too loud" and "a quarter of the audience are self-centered assholes"?</p><p>That's an innovative definition you've got there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By superior do you mean " volume 's too loud " and " a quarter of the audience are self-centered assholes " ? That 's an innovative definition you 've got there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By superior do you mean "volume's too loud" and "a quarter of the audience are self-centered assholes"?That's an innovative definition you've got there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426760</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260713460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's unlikely. They'll claim they spend more than ever to make movies and just barely make a profit. What they think is "We need new laws and ways to prevent consumers from watching the same movie twice without paying both times, watching movies on hardware not made by the same companies that own the movie studios or watching movies not made by the big studios."</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's unlikely .
They 'll claim they spend more than ever to make movies and just barely make a profit .
What they think is " We need new laws and ways to prevent consumers from watching the same movie twice without paying both times , watching movies on hardware not made by the same companies that own the movie studios or watching movies not made by the big studios .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's unlikely.
They'll claim they spend more than ever to make movies and just barely make a profit.
What they think is "We need new laws and ways to prevent consumers from watching the same movie twice without paying both times, watching movies on hardware not made by the same companies that own the movie studios or watching movies not made by the big studios.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429004</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1260784140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After spending a lot of time watching DVDs on 100Hz TV sets, I actually find the juddery screen experience at the cinema is often (but not always) inferior to home.  I know, they want to keep it that way because apparently 24fps is much more "artistic" or some BS, just like B&amp;W photography and monophonic sound apparently are.</p><p>And I'm not subjected to people hooting and throwing popcorn at home, for the most part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After spending a lot of time watching DVDs on 100Hz TV sets , I actually find the juddery screen experience at the cinema is often ( but not always ) inferior to home .
I know , they want to keep it that way because apparently 24fps is much more " artistic " or some BS , just like B&amp;W photography and monophonic sound apparently are.And I 'm not subjected to people hooting and throwing popcorn at home , for the most part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After spending a lot of time watching DVDs on 100Hz TV sets, I actually find the juddery screen experience at the cinema is often (but not always) inferior to home.
I know, they want to keep it that way because apparently 24fps is much more "artistic" or some BS, just like B&amp;W photography and monophonic sound apparently are.And I'm not subjected to people hooting and throwing popcorn at home, for the most part.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427402</id>
	<title>Re:Um, what about inflation?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260718740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, they would take that into account if it helped to prove the Slashdork point of view but since that would make the story much less sensational, to the point of proving the opposite of what the blurb assumes, it's left out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , they would take that into account if it helped to prove the Slashdork point of view but since that would make the story much less sensational , to the point of proving the opposite of what the blurb assumes , it 's left out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, they would take that into account if it helped to prove the Slashdork point of view but since that would make the story much less sensational, to the point of proving the opposite of what the blurb assumes, it's left out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534</id>
	<title>Big Suprise!</title>
	<author>LordofEntropy</author>
	<datestamp>1260711420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm shocked...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm shocked.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm shocked...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427174</id>
	<title>And in other news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260716580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Growth in retail sales proves that shoplifting is beneficial for shop owners.<br>Also,growth in highway fatalities proves that seat belts are dangerous,<br>and growth in violent crime clearly fingers video games.</p><p>Seriously, slashdot, this is the weakest argument ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Growth in retail sales proves that shoplifting is beneficial for shop owners.Also,growth in highway fatalities proves that seat belts are dangerous,and growth in violent crime clearly fingers video games.Seriously , slashdot , this is the weakest argument ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Growth in retail sales proves that shoplifting is beneficial for shop owners.Also,growth in highway fatalities proves that seat belts are dangerous,and growth in violent crime clearly fingers video games.Seriously, slashdot, this is the weakest argument ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431308</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260807840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because those people will all even own one million dollars. ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because those people will all even own one million dollars .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because those people will all even own one million dollars.
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430414</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1260802920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anymore, any movie I fail to see at the theatre is due to procrastination more than anything else. There is just no sense of urgency. So I put it off and before I know it they are advertising the DVD and BluRay already. So I can procrastinate some more and perhaps get that movie in the Walmart bargain bin or just put it in my Netflix Queue and see it... whenever.</p><p>All entertainment has to compete with everything else that can distract a person.</p><p>This includes 50 year old TV shows or 200 year old musical compositions or the latest Wii game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anymore , any movie I fail to see at the theatre is due to procrastination more than anything else .
There is just no sense of urgency .
So I put it off and before I know it they are advertising the DVD and BluRay already .
So I can procrastinate some more and perhaps get that movie in the Walmart bargain bin or just put it in my Netflix Queue and see it... whenever.All entertainment has to compete with everything else that can distract a person.This includes 50 year old TV shows or 200 year old musical compositions or the latest Wii game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anymore, any movie I fail to see at the theatre is due to procrastination more than anything else.
There is just no sense of urgency.
So I put it off and before I know it they are advertising the DVD and BluRay already.
So I can procrastinate some more and perhaps get that movie in the Walmart bargain bin or just put it in my Netflix Queue and see it... whenever.All entertainment has to compete with everything else that can distract a person.This includes 50 year old TV shows or 200 year old musical compositions or the latest Wii game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429098</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>WheelDweller</author>
	<datestamp>1260785940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I was gonna say....will Slashdot TIP OVER and crash if we all rush to the keyboards to say "AW, dem dam pirates! They're makin' the movie guys just waste away!"</p><p>Well, there's ONE lie they can't make anymore, now, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I was gon na say....will Slashdot TIP OVER and crash if we all rush to the keyboards to say " AW , dem dam pirates !
They 're makin ' the movie guys just waste away !
" Well , there 's ONE lie they ca n't make anymore , now , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I was gonna say....will Slashdot TIP OVER and crash if we all rush to the keyboards to say "AW, dem dam pirates!
They're makin' the movie guys just waste away!
"Well, there's ONE lie they can't make anymore, now, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426864</id>
	<title>Re:10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>R3d M3rcury</author>
	<datestamp>1260714180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.</p></div><p>No wonder you're an Anonymous Coward.  Dating 13 year old girls...tsk tsk...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.No wonder you 're an Anonymous Coward .
Dating 13 year old girls...tsk tsk.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We did go see Twilight god help me got being so whipped.No wonder you're an Anonymous Coward.
Dating 13 year old girls...tsk tsk...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427586</id>
	<title>Re:Why would anyone go to a theater?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1260721080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food, followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food, followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa, with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds' walking distance?</p> </div><p>Some women like to snuggle in public (and a movie theater counts).  Also, the seats in most theaters have retractable arm-rests these days.  Choose a theater close to one person's home.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food , followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food , followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa , with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds ' walking distance ?
Some women like to snuggle in public ( and a movie theater counts ) .
Also , the seats in most theaters have retractable arm-rests these days .
Choose a theater close to one person 's home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Soo... Sitting in a room full of people eating anonymous food, followed by sitting in another room full of people--this time with clear physical boundaries between you--trumps sitting in a room with just you two eating perhaps home-cooked food, followed by sitting in another room alone snuggling on a sofa, with an even more intimate room within 10 seconds' walking distance?
Some women like to snuggle in public (and a movie theater counts).
Also, the seats in most theaters have retractable arm-rests these days.
Choose a theater close to one person's home.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30450044</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Explodicle</author>
	<datestamp>1260872640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>it clearly shows a declining profit per movie</p></div></blockquote><p>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood\_accounting" title="wikipedia.org">"Hollywood accounting" on Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it clearly shows a declining profit per movie " Hollywood accounting " on Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it clearly shows a declining profit per movie

"Hollywood accounting" on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427038</id>
	<title>Dollars..</title>
	<author>ko9</author>
	<datestamp>1260715560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a lot of talk about inflation in the comments, but most people seem to forget about the US Dollar not being what it used to be, on the world stage. And Hollywood is definitely a worldwide business.

For example, if Europeans spent two billion Euros on movies 5 years ago, Hollywood would've made two billion Dollars.

If Europeans spent the same money on movies now, Hollywood would make three billion instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a lot of talk about inflation in the comments , but most people seem to forget about the US Dollar not being what it used to be , on the world stage .
And Hollywood is definitely a worldwide business .
For example , if Europeans spent two billion Euros on movies 5 years ago , Hollywood would 've made two billion Dollars .
If Europeans spent the same money on movies now , Hollywood would make three billion instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a lot of talk about inflation in the comments, but most people seem to forget about the US Dollar not being what it used to be, on the world stage.
And Hollywood is definitely a worldwide business.
For example, if Europeans spent two billion Euros on movies 5 years ago, Hollywood would've made two billion Dollars.
If Europeans spent the same money on movies now, Hollywood would make three billion instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30438730</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260800580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.</p></div><p>There's a difference between "pro-pirate" and "anti-big media policy".<br>I think<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. tends to be more of the later.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish Slashdot was n't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.There 's a difference between " pro-pirate " and " anti-big media policy " .I think / .
tends to be more of the later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish Slashdot wasn't such a fan of the pro-pirate spin.There's a difference between "pro-pirate" and "anti-big media policy".I think /.
tends to be more of the later.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429262</id>
	<title>If you need to use inflation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260788520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you need to use inflation to show a loss, AND IT'S A RECESSION, how bad can the losses be???</p><p>PS the answer is "no", but the increase is higher than inflation anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you need to use inflation to show a loss , AND IT 'S A RECESSION , how bad can the losses be ? ?
? PS the answer is " no " , but the increase is higher than inflation anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you need to use inflation to show a loss, AND IT'S A RECESSION, how bad can the losses be??
?PS the answer is "no", but the increase is higher than inflation anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427102</id>
	<title>Re:Torrent Freak not telling the whole truth again</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1260716040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The reason for the higher revenue? Higher ticket prices.</p></div></blockquote><p>Higher compared to what?  Are your statistics corrected for inflation?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason for the higher revenue ?
Higher ticket prices.Higher compared to what ?
Are your statistics corrected for inflation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason for the higher revenue?
Higher ticket prices.Higher compared to what?
Are your statistics corrected for inflation?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</id>
	<title>How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260711480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We could have made 20 Billion if it were n't for all of those pirates !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427046</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, but it is justification to call the "problem" of copyright infringement insignificant.</p><p>It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works. Were it not, they would have produced LESS each year. Since that is the only Constitutional purpose of copyright, we need add no more protections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , but it is justification to call the " problem " of copyright infringement insignificant.It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works .
Were it not , they would have produced LESS each year .
Since that is the only Constitutional purpose of copyright , we need add no more protections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, but it is justification to call the "problem" of copyright infringement insignificant.It is also justification for the viewpoint that copyright as it stands now is more than adequate to ensure more production of works.
Were it not, they would have produced LESS each year.
Since that is the only Constitutional purpose of copyright, we need add no more protections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426816</id>
	<title>They will still blame the "pirates"</title>
	<author>JavaBear</author>
	<datestamp>1260713880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they didn't make 20 billion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they did n't make 20 billion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they didn't make 20 billion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427592</id>
	<title>correlation is not causation</title>
	<author>Weezul</author>
	<datestamp>1260721080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find piracy an unlikely culprit largely because the quality is just so damn low usually, people use tv piracy mostly for time shifting and "nation shifting", but everyone uses TiVo whenever available, and movies start out higher quality, so your losing much much more.</p><p>I'd bet the single biggest reason is that television and home theaters have cut into their sales.</p><p>There are now more shows that more people *perceive* as high quality, more shows are designed to addict people (X Files, Lost, etc.), comedy shows have diversified, reality tv took off, and the array of channels is now staggering.  We make a big deal about all the computer graphics used in movies, but Hollywood always had the best effects guys, while computer graphic have dramatically improved tv's options too, and proportionally more so.</p><p>Conversely, we've radically advanced the home theater during the last decade, i.e. everyone got surround sound, good tvs and DVDs players, while people rarely choose their cinema based upon technology.  Another unprecedented shift has been how Netflicks, DVD vending machines, and TiVo all make tv vastly more convenient than movies, which leads to the big killer : TiVo, Netflicks, etc. let people watch tv with friends.  Yes, that's right, movies loose even on the social appeal!</p><p>It's also true that ticket prices have inflated while wages have not inflated, but I doubt that's significant next to the sheer onslaught of technological and cultural forces pushing us away from cinemas and towards home entertainment.  Internet usage will also have directly cut into ticket sales some too, especially among young people, but who knows how much.</p><p>I might buy an argument that movie piracy was hurting DVD sales of course, simply because many people want specific movies on their laptop for travel, but again we're seeing a "home theater" like effect where convenience overshadows other concerns.  Just consider, virtually every time you see people watching movies on a train, they're most likely tolerating the poor quality of a pirate version simply because they don't know how to successfully rip their own DVDs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find piracy an unlikely culprit largely because the quality is just so damn low usually , people use tv piracy mostly for time shifting and " nation shifting " , but everyone uses TiVo whenever available , and movies start out higher quality , so your losing much much more.I 'd bet the single biggest reason is that television and home theaters have cut into their sales.There are now more shows that more people * perceive * as high quality , more shows are designed to addict people ( X Files , Lost , etc .
) , comedy shows have diversified , reality tv took off , and the array of channels is now staggering .
We make a big deal about all the computer graphics used in movies , but Hollywood always had the best effects guys , while computer graphic have dramatically improved tv 's options too , and proportionally more so.Conversely , we 've radically advanced the home theater during the last decade , i.e .
everyone got surround sound , good tvs and DVDs players , while people rarely choose their cinema based upon technology .
Another unprecedented shift has been how Netflicks , DVD vending machines , and TiVo all make tv vastly more convenient than movies , which leads to the big killer : TiVo , Netflicks , etc .
let people watch tv with friends .
Yes , that 's right , movies loose even on the social appeal ! It 's also true that ticket prices have inflated while wages have not inflated , but I doubt that 's significant next to the sheer onslaught of technological and cultural forces pushing us away from cinemas and towards home entertainment .
Internet usage will also have directly cut into ticket sales some too , especially among young people , but who knows how much.I might buy an argument that movie piracy was hurting DVD sales of course , simply because many people want specific movies on their laptop for travel , but again we 're seeing a " home theater " like effect where convenience overshadows other concerns .
Just consider , virtually every time you see people watching movies on a train , they 're most likely tolerating the poor quality of a pirate version simply because they do n't know how to successfully rip their own DVDs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find piracy an unlikely culprit largely because the quality is just so damn low usually, people use tv piracy mostly for time shifting and "nation shifting", but everyone uses TiVo whenever available, and movies start out higher quality, so your losing much much more.I'd bet the single biggest reason is that television and home theaters have cut into their sales.There are now more shows that more people *perceive* as high quality, more shows are designed to addict people (X Files, Lost, etc.
), comedy shows have diversified, reality tv took off, and the array of channels is now staggering.
We make a big deal about all the computer graphics used in movies, but Hollywood always had the best effects guys, while computer graphic have dramatically improved tv's options too, and proportionally more so.Conversely, we've radically advanced the home theater during the last decade, i.e.
everyone got surround sound, good tvs and DVDs players, while people rarely choose their cinema based upon technology.
Another unprecedented shift has been how Netflicks, DVD vending machines, and TiVo all make tv vastly more convenient than movies, which leads to the big killer : TiVo, Netflicks, etc.
let people watch tv with friends.
Yes, that's right, movies loose even on the social appeal!It's also true that ticket prices have inflated while wages have not inflated, but I doubt that's significant next to the sheer onslaught of technological and cultural forces pushing us away from cinemas and towards home entertainment.
Internet usage will also have directly cut into ticket sales some too, especially among young people, but who knows how much.I might buy an argument that movie piracy was hurting DVD sales of course, simply because many people want specific movies on their laptop for travel, but again we're seeing a "home theater" like effect where convenience overshadows other concerns.
Just consider, virtually every time you see people watching movies on a train, they're most likely tolerating the poor quality of a pirate version simply because they don't know how to successfully rip their own DVDs!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430696</id>
	<title>Re:Going to the movies is different than buying on</title>
	<author>delt0r</author>
	<datestamp>1260804660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The last DVD i rented didn't play on my 3 computers or the DVD player properly. Guess where i got a copy that played just fine on all of them.
<br> <br>
Why rent/buy something that doesn't work.
<br> <br>
I get my money back when something goes wrong at a cinema.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The last DVD i rented did n't play on my 3 computers or the DVD player properly .
Guess where i got a copy that played just fine on all of them .
Why rent/buy something that does n't work .
I get my money back when something goes wrong at a cinema .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The last DVD i rented didn't play on my 3 computers or the DVD player properly.
Guess where i got a copy that played just fine on all of them.
Why rent/buy something that doesn't work.
I get my money back when something goes wrong at a cinema.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427964</id>
	<title>Re:10 Billion and only one movie I liked</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260725220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427056</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260715680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, wouldn't you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , would n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, wouldn't you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260714840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!"</p></div><p>So, the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate? We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich? Well, because that's what the whining here sounds like.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We could have made 20 Billion if it were n't for all of those pirates !
" So , the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate ?
We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich ?
Well , because that 's what the whining here sounds like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We could have made 20 Billion if it weren't for all of those pirates!
"So, the success of the Music / Entertainment Industry is justification to pirate?
We hate them and can rip them off because they are rich?
Well, because that's what the whining here sounds like.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427624</id>
	<title>Re:Big Suprise!</title>
	<author>uuddlrlrab</author>
	<datestamp>1260721620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, really...
<br> <br>
I'm shocked.<br>
I am...
<br> <br>
Honest.
<br> <br>
I'm being super-cereal!</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , really.. . I 'm shocked .
I am.. . Honest . I 'm being super-cereal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, really...
 
I'm shocked.
I am...
 
Honest.
 
I'm being super-cereal!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426730</id>
	<title>Re:How the MPAA thinks:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260713100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when is holywood into pxrn ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when is holywood into pxrn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when is holywood into pxrn ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430080</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1260800340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and<br>&gt; other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and<br>&gt; doing things with them. Then they would look up and say something to effect of,<br>&gt; "I can't feed my family. Because thieves steal my work online."</p><p>Simply assinine.</p><p>No one is going to respond to self serving preaching. This the dumbest form of<br>an attempt to persuade people imaginable. It's really sad considering the fact<br>that it's Hollywood we're talking about here.</p><p>None of the preaching or moralizing should even be visible.</p><p>Simply give these guys some credit and a little spotlight and let people know<br>that it's more than just about overpaid stars and j*ac*ss whiney directors.</p><p>The (sympathetic) blanks should fill themselves in. The audience should be led<br>to the desired conclusion in a manner that makes them think they came up with<br>the idea themselves.</p><p>A good "behind the scenes" segment would also be a lot more entertaining than<br>the dreck that they should before movies now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double , key grip and &gt; other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families , eating and &gt; doing things with them .
Then they would look up and say something to effect of , &gt; " I ca n't feed my family .
Because thieves steal my work online .
" Simply assinine.No one is going to respond to self serving preaching .
This the dumbest form ofan attempt to persuade people imaginable .
It 's really sad considering the factthat it 's Hollywood we 're talking about here.None of the preaching or moralizing should even be visible.Simply give these guys some credit and a little spotlight and let people knowthat it 's more than just about overpaid stars and j * ac * ss whiney directors.The ( sympathetic ) blanks should fill themselves in .
The audience should be ledto the desired conclusion in a manner that makes them think they came up withthe idea themselves.A good " behind the scenes " segment would also be a lot more entertaining thanthe dreck that they should before movies now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Back in college I saw an ad before a movie where a stunt double, key grip and&gt; other low paid stagehands were filmed in front of their families, eating and&gt; doing things with them.
Then they would look up and say something to effect of,&gt; "I can't feed my family.
Because thieves steal my work online.
"Simply assinine.No one is going to respond to self serving preaching.
This the dumbest form ofan attempt to persuade people imaginable.
It's really sad considering the factthat it's Hollywood we're talking about here.None of the preaching or moralizing should even be visible.Simply give these guys some credit and a little spotlight and let people knowthat it's more than just about overpaid stars and j*ac*ss whiney directors.The (sympathetic) blanks should fill themselves in.
The audience should be ledto the desired conclusion in a manner that makes them think they came up withthe idea themselves.A good "behind the scenes" segment would also be a lot more entertaining thanthe dreck that they should before movies now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430442</id>
	<title>Now if only they could make good movies...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260803100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Idea: Take George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts, and a lot of other insufferable big-name actors and they'll pull off the biggest heist of their lives... robbing not only the American goer, but movie goers all over the world.   The goal: To build an elaborate movie under the guise of being the next great movie, making sure it's as terrible and ridiculous as possible.  After all the big budget advertising they reap the sales profit from their intellectually devoid cash-cow, and escape to their multimillion dollar homes, millions of dollars richer.</p><p>The only problem? No one has made this movie already, therefor we can't remake it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Idea : Take George Clooney , Brad Pitt , Matt Damon , Julia Roberts , and a lot of other insufferable big-name actors and they 'll pull off the biggest heist of their lives... robbing not only the American goer , but movie goers all over the world .
The goal : To build an elaborate movie under the guise of being the next great movie , making sure it 's as terrible and ridiculous as possible .
After all the big budget advertising they reap the sales profit from their intellectually devoid cash-cow , and escape to their multimillion dollar homes , millions of dollars richer.The only problem ?
No one has made this movie already , therefor we ca n't remake it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Idea: Take George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts, and a lot of other insufferable big-name actors and they'll pull off the biggest heist of their lives... robbing not only the American goer, but movie goers all over the world.
The goal: To build an elaborate movie under the guise of being the next great movie, making sure it's as terrible and ridiculous as possible.
After all the big budget advertising they reap the sales profit from their intellectually devoid cash-cow, and escape to their multimillion dollar homes, millions of dollars richer.The only problem?
No one has made this movie already, therefor we can't remake it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428244</id>
	<title>Pay Czar for Hollywood</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260728820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering the economic issues that we are dealing with, why doesn't the public have a problem with Hollywood. I was visiting some friends on thanksgiving, so I tagged along to watch Ninja Assasin. I payed $8.50 to get in and the theater was packed. I didn't have enough time to get something to eat before the movie so I bought a bag of popcorn and a large drink $16.45(I was really hungry). I then watched a movie that I would have normally turned off in the first 30 min or at least be distracted easily if at home. I feel that after that experince I have payed my fair share to hollywood for every movie that I have ever downloaded or will download for the next 10 years. That money could have gone to so many better things than an actor or director or writer or whoever got a share. We waste our money on trivial things and don't have a problem with people taking an assload of our money for theater, sports and other things. Government caps on actors and athletes as well as the executives should be considered when reports of these kind of earnings come out. The problem is we shouldn't need the government to keep us from wasting our money. If there wasn't another movie made ever again then I believe the world would be better for it. If all the athletes were average people just playing a game without sponsors and multi-million dollar contracts then how much more productive could our society be. Why waste the resources on a movie or game when we have real problem that need solved. I admit that I download movies to watch when I have nothing better to do but we live in a society that watching a movie or a game is the best thing to do most of the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the economic issues that we are dealing with , why does n't the public have a problem with Hollywood .
I was visiting some friends on thanksgiving , so I tagged along to watch Ninja Assasin .
I payed $ 8.50 to get in and the theater was packed .
I did n't have enough time to get something to eat before the movie so I bought a bag of popcorn and a large drink $ 16.45 ( I was really hungry ) .
I then watched a movie that I would have normally turned off in the first 30 min or at least be distracted easily if at home .
I feel that after that experince I have payed my fair share to hollywood for every movie that I have ever downloaded or will download for the next 10 years .
That money could have gone to so many better things than an actor or director or writer or whoever got a share .
We waste our money on trivial things and do n't have a problem with people taking an assload of our money for theater , sports and other things .
Government caps on actors and athletes as well as the executives should be considered when reports of these kind of earnings come out .
The problem is we should n't need the government to keep us from wasting our money .
If there was n't another movie made ever again then I believe the world would be better for it .
If all the athletes were average people just playing a game without sponsors and multi-million dollar contracts then how much more productive could our society be .
Why waste the resources on a movie or game when we have real problem that need solved .
I admit that I download movies to watch when I have nothing better to do but we live in a society that watching a movie or a game is the best thing to do most of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the economic issues that we are dealing with, why doesn't the public have a problem with Hollywood.
I was visiting some friends on thanksgiving, so I tagged along to watch Ninja Assasin.
I payed $8.50 to get in and the theater was packed.
I didn't have enough time to get something to eat before the movie so I bought a bag of popcorn and a large drink $16.45(I was really hungry).
I then watched a movie that I would have normally turned off in the first 30 min or at least be distracted easily if at home.
I feel that after that experince I have payed my fair share to hollywood for every movie that I have ever downloaded or will download for the next 10 years.
That money could have gone to so many better things than an actor or director or writer or whoever got a share.
We waste our money on trivial things and don't have a problem with people taking an assload of our money for theater, sports and other things.
Government caps on actors and athletes as well as the executives should be considered when reports of these kind of earnings come out.
The problem is we shouldn't need the government to keep us from wasting our money.
If there wasn't another movie made ever again then I believe the world would be better for it.
If all the athletes were average people just playing a game without sponsors and multi-million dollar contracts then how much more productive could our society be.
Why waste the resources on a movie or game when we have real problem that need solved.
I admit that I download movies to watch when I have nothing better to do but we live in a society that watching a movie or a game is the best thing to do most of the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428366</id>
	<title>Subject</title>
	<author>Legion303</author>
	<datestamp>1260730620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why, it's almost as though consumer video recording devices didn't kill the industry at all. How strange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why , it 's almost as though consumer video recording devices did n't kill the industry at all .
How strange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why, it's almost as though consumer video recording devices didn't kill the industry at all.
How strange.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427210</id>
	<title>Re:typical spin job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260716940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course Slashdot is going to spin everything its own way; what else would you expect?  I don't really know enough about the numbers, but there is a saying around here that correlation != causation; I would caution that just because Hollywood is setting box office records doesn't mean piracy doesn't hurt them.  Obviously it doesn't to the extent they would like you to believe, but sometimes I wonder what would happen if piracy were not an option; would more people buy more copies, or would they just make do without?  I honestly don't know the answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course Slashdot is going to spin everything its own way ; what else would you expect ?
I do n't really know enough about the numbers , but there is a saying around here that correlation ! = causation ; I would caution that just because Hollywood is setting box office records does n't mean piracy does n't hurt them .
Obviously it does n't to the extent they would like you to believe , but sometimes I wonder what would happen if piracy were not an option ; would more people buy more copies , or would they just make do without ?
I honestly do n't know the answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course Slashdot is going to spin everything its own way; what else would you expect?
I don't really know enough about the numbers, but there is a saying around here that correlation != causation; I would caution that just because Hollywood is setting box office records doesn't mean piracy doesn't hurt them.
Obviously it doesn't to the extent they would like you to believe, but sometimes I wonder what would happen if piracy were not an option; would more people buy more copies, or would they just make do without?
I honestly don't know the answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429450</id>
	<title>Re:Hollywood Traditionally Does Well In Recessions</title>
	<author>Lord Maud'Dib</author>
	<datestamp>1260791520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same with alcohol sales.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same with alcohol sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same with alcohol sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430476</id>
	<title>Re:Proposed Anti-Anti-Piracy Advertisement</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1260803460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales, which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry, which in turn leads to fewer films being made (ie. studios taking fewer chances on risky, smaller productions) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.</p></div><p>I'm sure that would be the logic that they use, but the main point of this news item is that it's completely false.
<br> <br>
And since I'm not an expert in philosophy and logic, I'd be curious to know what part of my statement is a straw man. The initial statement (assuming the person posting it is correct) was that the manual labor workers weren't getting paid enough money because of people illegally obtaining copies of the movies that they worked on. My response was that it doesn't matter how many people pay to see a movie and how many obtain it illegally, because the workers have already been paid the only salary that they would ever get from that movie. Of course you could try to argue that reduced sales would lead to less work for them, but the report of record income seems to counter that pretty well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales , which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry , which in turn leads to fewer films being made ( ie .
studios taking fewer chances on risky , smaller productions ) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.I 'm sure that would be the logic that they use , but the main point of this news item is that it 's completely false .
And since I 'm not an expert in philosophy and logic , I 'd be curious to know what part of my statement is a straw man .
The initial statement ( assuming the person posting it is correct ) was that the manual labor workers were n't getting paid enough money because of people illegally obtaining copies of the movies that they worked on .
My response was that it does n't matter how many people pay to see a movie and how many obtain it illegally , because the workers have already been paid the only salary that they would ever get from that movie .
Of course you could try to argue that reduced sales would lead to less work for them , but the report of record income seems to counter that pretty well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The logic employed by the MPAA is that piracy reduces sales, which in turn leads to cost cutting in the industry, which in turn leads to fewer films being made (ie.
studios taking fewer chances on risky, smaller productions) or cutting costs by employing fewer people or moving productions to other countries.I'm sure that would be the logic that they use, but the main point of this news item is that it's completely false.
And since I'm not an expert in philosophy and logic, I'd be curious to know what part of my statement is a straw man.
The initial statement (assuming the person posting it is correct) was that the manual labor workers weren't getting paid enough money because of people illegally obtaining copies of the movies that they worked on.
My response was that it doesn't matter how many people pay to see a movie and how many obtain it illegally, because the workers have already been paid the only salary that they would ever get from that movie.
Of course you could try to argue that reduced sales would lead to less work for them, but the report of record income seems to counter that pretty well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427930</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30436604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30435388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30450044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30438730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30437884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_13_2254218_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427176
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426640
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427038
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427250
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426568
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427004
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30435388
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429054
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30450044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426960
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427046
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30436604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428762
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30434696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30437884
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429290
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427930
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30430808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30426914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30431744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30427472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30438730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30428982
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_13_2254218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_13_2254218.30429856
</commentlist>
</conversation>
