<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_31_0420244</id>
	<title>DRM and the Destruction of the Book</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1262264100000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/slashdot/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> writes <i>"EFF reports that Cory Doctorow spoke to a crowd of about a hundred librarians, educators, publishers, authors, and students at the National Reading Summit on How to Destroy the Book and said that 'anyone who claims that readers can&rsquo;t and won&rsquo;t and shouldn&rsquo;t own their books are <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/doctorow-how-destroy-book">bent on the destruction of the book</a>, the destruction of publishing, and the destruction of authorship itself.' Doctorow says that for centuries, copyright has acknowledged that sacred connection between readers and their books and that when you own a book 'it&rsquo;s yours to give away, yours to keep, yours to license or to borrow, to inherit or to be included in your safe for your children' and that 'the most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens writes " EFF reports that Cory Doctorow spoke to a crowd of about a hundred librarians , educators , publishers , authors , and students at the National Reading Summit on How to Destroy the Book and said that 'anyone who claims that readers can    t and won    t and shouldn    t own their books are bent on the destruction of the book , the destruction of publishing , and the destruction of authorship itself .
' Doctorow says that for centuries , copyright has acknowledged that sacred connection between readers and their books and that when you own a book 'it    s yours to give away , yours to keep , yours to license or to borrow , to inherit or to be included in your safe for your children ' and that 'the most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens writes "EFF reports that Cory Doctorow spoke to a crowd of about a hundred librarians, educators, publishers, authors, and students at the National Reading Summit on How to Destroy the Book and said that 'anyone who claims that readers can’t and won’t and shouldn’t own their books are bent on the destruction of the book, the destruction of publishing, and the destruction of authorship itself.
' Doctorow says that for centuries, copyright has acknowledged that sacred connection between readers and their books and that when you own a book 'it’s yours to give away, yours to keep, yours to license or to borrow, to inherit or to be included in your safe for your children' and that 'the most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604466</id>
	<title>The Right To Read by Richard Stallman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article appeared in the February 1997 issue of Communications of the ACM (Volume 40, Number 2).</p><blockquote><div><p>From The Road To Tycho, a collection of articles about the antecedents of the Lunarian Revolution, published in Luna City in 2096.</p></div> </blockquote><p>For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college&mdash;when Lissa Lenz asked to borrow his computer. Hers had broken down, and unless she could borrow another, she would fail her midterm project. There was no one she dared ask, except Dan.</p><p>This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her&mdash;but if he lent her his computer, she might read his books. Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books, the very idea shocked him at first. Like everyone, he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong&mdash;something that only pirates would do.</p><p>And there wasn't much chance that the SPA&mdash;the Software Protection Authority&mdash;would fail to catch him. In his software class, Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that reported when and where it was read, and by whom, to Central Licensing. (They used this information to catch reading pirates, but also to sell personal interest profiles to retailers.) The next time his computer was networked, Central Licensing would find out. He, as computer owner, would receive the harshest punishment&mdash;for not taking pains to prevent the crime.</p><p>Of course, Lissa did not necessarily intend to read his books. She might want the computer only to write her midterm. But Dan knew she came from a middle-class family and could hardly afford the tuition, let alone her reading fees. Reading his books might be the only way she could graduate. He understood this situation; he himself had had to borrow to pay for all the research papers he read. (Ten percent of those fees went to the researchers who wrote the papers; since Dan aimed for an academic career, he could hope that his own research papers, if frequently referenced, would bring in enough to repay this loan.)</p><p>Later on, Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the library and read journal articles, and even books, without having to pay. There were independent scholars who read thousands of pages without government library grants. But in the 1990s, both commercial and nonprofit journal publishers had begun charging fees for access. By 2047, libraries offering free public access to scholarly literature were a dim memory.</p><p>There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central Licensing. They were themselves illegal. Dan had had a classmate in software, Frank Martucci, who had obtained an illicit debugging tool, and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading books. But he had told too many friends about it, and one of them turned him in to the SPA for a reward (students deep in debt were easily tempted into betrayal). In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.</p><p>Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.</p><p>Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.</p><p>It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel. Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like debuggers&mdash;you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.</p><p>Dan concluded that he couldn't simply lend Lissa his computer. But he couldn't refuse to help her, because he loved her. Every chance to speak with her filled him with delight. And that she chose him to ask for help, that could mean she loved him too.</p><p>Dan resolved the dilemma by doing something even more unthinkable&mdash;he lent her the computer, and told her his password. This way, if Lissa read his books, Central Licensing would think he was reading them. It was still a crime, but the SPA would not automatically find out about it. They would only find out if Lissa reported him.</p><p>Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students, regardless of what she had used it for. School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action. It didn't matter whether you did anything harmful&mdash;the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you. They assumed this meant you were doing something else forbidden, and they did not need to know what it was.</p><p>Students were not usually expelled for this&mdash;not directly. Instead they were banned from the school computer systems, and would inevitably fail all their classes.</p><p>Later, Dan would learn that this kind of university policy started only in the 1980s, when university students in large numbers began using computers. Previously, universities maintained a different approach to student discipline; they punished activities that were harmful, not those that merely raised suspicion.</p><p>Lissa did not report Dan to the SPA. His decision to help her led to their marriage, and also led them to question what they had been taught about piracy as children. The couple began reading about the history of copyright, about the Soviet Union and its restrictions on copying, and even the original United States Constitution. They moved to Luna, where they found others who had likewise gravitated away from the long arm of the SPA. When the Tycho Uprising began in 2062, the universal right to read soon became one of its central aims.</p><p><b>Author's Note</b></p><p>This note was updated in 2007.</p><p>The right to read is a battle being fought today. Although it may take 50 years for our present way of life to fade into obscurity, most of the specific laws and practices described above have already been proposed; many have been enacted into law in the US and elsewhere. In the US, the 1998 Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) established the legal basis to restrict the reading and lending of computerized books (and other works as well). The European Union imposed similar restrictions in a 2001 copyright directive. In France, under the DADVSI law adopted in 2006, mere possession of a copy of DeCSS, the free program to decrypt video on a DVD, is a crime.</p><p>In 2001, Disney-funded Senator Hollings proposed a bill called the SSSCA that would require every new computer to have mandatory copy-restriction facilities that the user cannot bypass. Following the Clipper chip and similar US government key-escrow proposals, this shows a long-term trend: computer systems are increasingly set up to give absentees with clout control over the people actually using the computer system. The SSSCA was later renamed to the unpronounceable CBDTPA, which was glossed as the &ldquo;Consume But Don't Try Programming Act&rdquo;.</p><p>The Republicans took control of the US senate shortly thereafter. They are less tied to Hollywood than the Democrats, so they did not press these proposals. Now that the Democrats are back in control, the danger is once again higher.</p><p>In 2001 the US began attempting to use the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) treaty to impose the same rules on all the countries in the Western Hemisphere. The FTAA is one of the so-called &ldquo;free trade&rdquo; treaties, which are actually designed to give business increased power over democratic governments; imposing laws like the DMCA is typical of this spirit. The FTAA was effectively killed by Lula, President of Brazil, who rejected the DMCA requirement and others.</p><p>Since then, the US has imposed similar requirements on countries such as Australia and Mexico through bilateral &ldquo;free trade&rdquo; agreements, and on countries such as Costa Rica through another treaty, CAFTA. Ecuador's President Correa refused to sign a &ldquo;free trade&rdquo; agreement with the US, but I've heard Ecuador had adopted something like the DMCA in 2003.</p><p>One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002. This is the idea that the FBI and Microsoft will keep the root passwords for your personal computers, and not let you have them.</p><p>The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as &ldquo;trusted computing&rdquo; and &ldquo;Palladium&rdquo;. We call it &ldquo;treacherous computing&rdquo; because the effect is to make your computer obey companies even to the extent of disobeying and defying you. This was implemented in 2007 as part of Windows Vista; we expect Apple to do something similar. In this scheme, it is the manufacturer that keeps the secret code, but the FBI would have little trouble getting it.</p><p>What Microsoft keeps is not exactly a password in the traditional sense; no person ever types it on a terminal. Rather, it is a signature and encryption key that corresponds to a second key stored in your computer. This enables Microsoft, and potentially any web sites that cooperate with Microsoft, the ultimate control over what the user can do on his own computer.</p><p>Vista also gives Microsoft additional powers; for instance, Microsoft can forcibly install upgrades, and it can order all machines running Vista to refuse to run a certain device driver. The main purpose of Vista's many restrictions is to impose DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) that users can't overcome. The threat of DRM is why we have established the DefectiveByDesign.org campaign.</p><p>When this story was first written, the SPA was threatening small Internet service providers, demanding they permit the SPA to monitor all users. Most ISPs surrendered when threatened, because they cannot afford to fight back in court. One ISP, Community ConneXion in Oakland, California, refused the demand and was actually sued. The SPA later dropped the suit, but obtained the DMCA, which gave them the power they sought.</p><p>The SPA, which actually stands for Software Publisher's Association, has been replaced in its police-like role by the Business Software Alliance. The BSA is not, today, an official police force; unofficially, it acts like one. Using methods reminiscent of the erstwhile Soviet Union, it invites people to inform on their coworkers and friends. A BSA terror campaign in Argentina in 2001 made slightly veiled threats that people sharing software would be raped.</p><p>The university security policies described above are not imaginary. For example, a computer at one Chicago-area university displayed this message upon login:</p><p>"This system is for the use of authorized users only. Individuals using this computer system without authority or in the excess of their authority are subject to having all their activities on this system monitored and recorded by system personnel. In the course of monitoring individuals improperly using this system or in the course of system maintenance, the activities of authorized user may also be monitored. Anyone using this system expressly consents to such monitoring and is advised that if such monitoring reveals possible evidence of illegal activity or violation of University regulations system personnel may provide the evidence of such monitoring to University authorities and/or law enforcement officials."</p><p>This is an interesting approach to the Fourth Amendment: pressure most everyone to agree, in advance, to waive their rights under it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article appeared in the February 1997 issue of Communications of the ACM ( Volume 40 , Number 2 ) .From The Road To Tycho , a collection of articles about the antecedents of the Lunarian Revolution , published in Luna City in 2096 .
For Dan Halbert , the road to Tycho began in college    when Lissa Lenz asked to borrow his computer .
Hers had broken down , and unless she could borrow another , she would fail her midterm project .
There was no one she dared ask , except Dan.This put Dan in a dilemma .
He had to help her    but if he lent her his computer , she might read his books .
Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books , the very idea shocked him at first .
Like everyone , he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong    something that only pirates would do.And there was n't much chance that the SPA    the Software Protection Authority    would fail to catch him .
In his software class , Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that reported when and where it was read , and by whom , to Central Licensing .
( They used this information to catch reading pirates , but also to sell personal interest profiles to retailers .
) The next time his computer was networked , Central Licensing would find out .
He , as computer owner , would receive the harshest punishment    for not taking pains to prevent the crime.Of course , Lissa did not necessarily intend to read his books .
She might want the computer only to write her midterm .
But Dan knew she came from a middle-class family and could hardly afford the tuition , let alone her reading fees .
Reading his books might be the only way she could graduate .
He understood this situation ; he himself had had to borrow to pay for all the research papers he read .
( Ten percent of those fees went to the researchers who wrote the papers ; since Dan aimed for an academic career , he could hope that his own research papers , if frequently referenced , would bring in enough to repay this loan .
) Later on , Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the library and read journal articles , and even books , without having to pay .
There were independent scholars who read thousands of pages without government library grants .
But in the 1990s , both commercial and nonprofit journal publishers had begun charging fees for access .
By 2047 , libraries offering free public access to scholarly literature were a dim memory.There were ways , of course , to get around the SPA and Central Licensing .
They were themselves illegal .
Dan had had a classmate in software , Frank Martucci , who had obtained an illicit debugging tool , and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading books .
But he had told too many friends about it , and one of them turned him in to the SPA for a reward ( students deep in debt were easily tempted into betrayal ) .
In 2047 , Frank was in prison , not for pirate reading , but for possessing a debugger.Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools .
There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net .
But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors , and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice .
This meant they were illegal ; the debuggers ' developers were sent to prison.Programmers still needed debugging tools , of course , but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only , and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers .
The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel .
Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels , even entire free operating systems , that had existed around the turn of the century .
But not only were they illegal , like debuggers    you could not install one if you had one , without knowing your computer 's root password .
And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.Dan concluded that he could n't simply lend Lissa his computer .
But he could n't refuse to help her , because he loved her .
Every chance to speak with her filled him with delight .
And that she chose him to ask for help , that could mean she loved him too.Dan resolved the dilemma by doing something even more unthinkable    he lent her the computer , and told her his password .
This way , if Lissa read his books , Central Licensing would think he was reading them .
It was still a crime , but the SPA would not automatically find out about it .
They would only find out if Lissa reported him.Of course , if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password , it would be curtains for both of them as students , regardless of what she had used it for .
School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students ' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action .
It did n't matter whether you did anything harmful    the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you .
They assumed this meant you were doing something else forbidden , and they did not need to know what it was.Students were not usually expelled for this    not directly .
Instead they were banned from the school computer systems , and would inevitably fail all their classes.Later , Dan would learn that this kind of university policy started only in the 1980s , when university students in large numbers began using computers .
Previously , universities maintained a different approach to student discipline ; they punished activities that were harmful , not those that merely raised suspicion.Lissa did not report Dan to the SPA .
His decision to help her led to their marriage , and also led them to question what they had been taught about piracy as children .
The couple began reading about the history of copyright , about the Soviet Union and its restrictions on copying , and even the original United States Constitution .
They moved to Luna , where they found others who had likewise gravitated away from the long arm of the SPA .
When the Tycho Uprising began in 2062 , the universal right to read soon became one of its central aims.Author 's NoteThis note was updated in 2007.The right to read is a battle being fought today .
Although it may take 50 years for our present way of life to fade into obscurity , most of the specific laws and practices described above have already been proposed ; many have been enacted into law in the US and elsewhere .
In the US , the 1998 Digital Millenium Copyright Act ( DMCA ) established the legal basis to restrict the reading and lending of computerized books ( and other works as well ) .
The European Union imposed similar restrictions in a 2001 copyright directive .
In France , under the DADVSI law adopted in 2006 , mere possession of a copy of DeCSS , the free program to decrypt video on a DVD , is a crime.In 2001 , Disney-funded Senator Hollings proposed a bill called the SSSCA that would require every new computer to have mandatory copy-restriction facilities that the user can not bypass .
Following the Clipper chip and similar US government key-escrow proposals , this shows a long-term trend : computer systems are increasingly set up to give absentees with clout control over the people actually using the computer system .
The SSSCA was later renamed to the unpronounceable CBDTPA , which was glossed as the    Consume But Do n't Try Programming Act    .The Republicans took control of the US senate shortly thereafter .
They are less tied to Hollywood than the Democrats , so they did not press these proposals .
Now that the Democrats are back in control , the danger is once again higher.In 2001 the US began attempting to use the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas ( FTAA ) treaty to impose the same rules on all the countries in the Western Hemisphere .
The FTAA is one of the so-called    free trade    treaties , which are actually designed to give business increased power over democratic governments ; imposing laws like the DMCA is typical of this spirit .
The FTAA was effectively killed by Lula , President of Brazil , who rejected the DMCA requirement and others.Since then , the US has imposed similar requirements on countries such as Australia and Mexico through bilateral    free trade    agreements , and on countries such as Costa Rica through another treaty , CAFTA .
Ecuador 's President Correa refused to sign a    free trade    agreement with the US , but I 've heard Ecuador had adopted something like the DMCA in 2003.One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002 .
This is the idea that the FBI and Microsoft will keep the root passwords for your personal computers , and not let you have them.The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as    trusted computing    and    Palladium    .
We call it    treacherous computing    because the effect is to make your computer obey companies even to the extent of disobeying and defying you .
This was implemented in 2007 as part of Windows Vista ; we expect Apple to do something similar .
In this scheme , it is the manufacturer that keeps the secret code , but the FBI would have little trouble getting it.What Microsoft keeps is not exactly a password in the traditional sense ; no person ever types it on a terminal .
Rather , it is a signature and encryption key that corresponds to a second key stored in your computer .
This enables Microsoft , and potentially any web sites that cooperate with Microsoft , the ultimate control over what the user can do on his own computer.Vista also gives Microsoft additional powers ; for instance , Microsoft can forcibly install upgrades , and it can order all machines running Vista to refuse to run a certain device driver .
The main purpose of Vista 's many restrictions is to impose DRM ( Digital Restrictions Management ) that users ca n't overcome .
The threat of DRM is why we have established the DefectiveByDesign.org campaign.When this story was first written , the SPA was threatening small Internet service providers , demanding they permit the SPA to monitor all users .
Most ISPs surrendered when threatened , because they can not afford to fight back in court .
One ISP , Community ConneXion in Oakland , California , refused the demand and was actually sued .
The SPA later dropped the suit , but obtained the DMCA , which gave them the power they sought.The SPA , which actually stands for Software Publisher 's Association , has been replaced in its police-like role by the Business Software Alliance .
The BSA is not , today , an official police force ; unofficially , it acts like one .
Using methods reminiscent of the erstwhile Soviet Union , it invites people to inform on their coworkers and friends .
A BSA terror campaign in Argentina in 2001 made slightly veiled threats that people sharing software would be raped.The university security policies described above are not imaginary .
For example , a computer at one Chicago-area university displayed this message upon login : " This system is for the use of authorized users only .
Individuals using this computer system without authority or in the excess of their authority are subject to having all their activities on this system monitored and recorded by system personnel .
In the course of monitoring individuals improperly using this system or in the course of system maintenance , the activities of authorized user may also be monitored .
Anyone using this system expressly consents to such monitoring and is advised that if such monitoring reveals possible evidence of illegal activity or violation of University regulations system personnel may provide the evidence of such monitoring to University authorities and/or law enforcement officials .
" This is an interesting approach to the Fourth Amendment : pressure most everyone to agree , in advance , to waive their rights under it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article appeared in the February 1997 issue of Communications of the ACM (Volume 40, Number 2).From The Road To Tycho, a collection of articles about the antecedents of the Lunarian Revolution, published in Luna City in 2096.
For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college—when Lissa Lenz asked to borrow his computer.
Hers had broken down, and unless she could borrow another, she would fail her midterm project.
There was no one she dared ask, except Dan.This put Dan in a dilemma.
He had to help her—but if he lent her his computer, she might read his books.
Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books, the very idea shocked him at first.
Like everyone, he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong—something that only pirates would do.And there wasn't much chance that the SPA—the Software Protection Authority—would fail to catch him.
In his software class, Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that reported when and where it was read, and by whom, to Central Licensing.
(They used this information to catch reading pirates, but also to sell personal interest profiles to retailers.
) The next time his computer was networked, Central Licensing would find out.
He, as computer owner, would receive the harshest punishment—for not taking pains to prevent the crime.Of course, Lissa did not necessarily intend to read his books.
She might want the computer only to write her midterm.
But Dan knew she came from a middle-class family and could hardly afford the tuition, let alone her reading fees.
Reading his books might be the only way she could graduate.
He understood this situation; he himself had had to borrow to pay for all the research papers he read.
(Ten percent of those fees went to the researchers who wrote the papers; since Dan aimed for an academic career, he could hope that his own research papers, if frequently referenced, would bring in enough to repay this loan.
)Later on, Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the library and read journal articles, and even books, without having to pay.
There were independent scholars who read thousands of pages without government library grants.
But in the 1990s, both commercial and nonprofit journal publishers had begun charging fees for access.
By 2047, libraries offering free public access to scholarly literature were a dim memory.There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central Licensing.
They were themselves illegal.
Dan had had a classmate in software, Frank Martucci, who had obtained an illicit debugging tool, and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading books.
But he had told too many friends about it, and one of them turned him in to the SPA for a reward (students deep in debt were easily tempted into betrayal).
In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have debugging tools.
There were even free debugging tools available on CD or downloadable over the net.
But ordinary users started using them to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice.
This meant they were illegal; the debuggers' developers were sent to prison.Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers.
The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel.
Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century.
But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password.
And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.Dan concluded that he couldn't simply lend Lissa his computer.
But he couldn't refuse to help her, because he loved her.
Every chance to speak with her filled him with delight.
And that she chose him to ask for help, that could mean she loved him too.Dan resolved the dilemma by doing something even more unthinkable—he lent her the computer, and told her his password.
This way, if Lissa read his books, Central Licensing would think he was reading them.
It was still a crime, but the SPA would not automatically find out about it.
They would only find out if Lissa reported him.Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students, regardless of what she had used it for.
School policy was that any interference with their means of monitoring students' computer use was grounds for disciplinary action.
It didn't matter whether you did anything harmful—the offense was making it hard for the administrators to check on you.
They assumed this meant you were doing something else forbidden, and they did not need to know what it was.Students were not usually expelled for this—not directly.
Instead they were banned from the school computer systems, and would inevitably fail all their classes.Later, Dan would learn that this kind of university policy started only in the 1980s, when university students in large numbers began using computers.
Previously, universities maintained a different approach to student discipline; they punished activities that were harmful, not those that merely raised suspicion.Lissa did not report Dan to the SPA.
His decision to help her led to their marriage, and also led them to question what they had been taught about piracy as children.
The couple began reading about the history of copyright, about the Soviet Union and its restrictions on copying, and even the original United States Constitution.
They moved to Luna, where they found others who had likewise gravitated away from the long arm of the SPA.
When the Tycho Uprising began in 2062, the universal right to read soon became one of its central aims.Author's NoteThis note was updated in 2007.The right to read is a battle being fought today.
Although it may take 50 years for our present way of life to fade into obscurity, most of the specific laws and practices described above have already been proposed; many have been enacted into law in the US and elsewhere.
In the US, the 1998 Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) established the legal basis to restrict the reading and lending of computerized books (and other works as well).
The European Union imposed similar restrictions in a 2001 copyright directive.
In France, under the DADVSI law adopted in 2006, mere possession of a copy of DeCSS, the free program to decrypt video on a DVD, is a crime.In 2001, Disney-funded Senator Hollings proposed a bill called the SSSCA that would require every new computer to have mandatory copy-restriction facilities that the user cannot bypass.
Following the Clipper chip and similar US government key-escrow proposals, this shows a long-term trend: computer systems are increasingly set up to give absentees with clout control over the people actually using the computer system.
The SSSCA was later renamed to the unpronounceable CBDTPA, which was glossed as the “Consume But Don't Try Programming Act”.The Republicans took control of the US senate shortly thereafter.
They are less tied to Hollywood than the Democrats, so they did not press these proposals.
Now that the Democrats are back in control, the danger is once again higher.In 2001 the US began attempting to use the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) treaty to impose the same rules on all the countries in the Western Hemisphere.
The FTAA is one of the so-called “free trade” treaties, which are actually designed to give business increased power over democratic governments; imposing laws like the DMCA is typical of this spirit.
The FTAA was effectively killed by Lula, President of Brazil, who rejected the DMCA requirement and others.Since then, the US has imposed similar requirements on countries such as Australia and Mexico through bilateral “free trade” agreements, and on countries such as Costa Rica through another treaty, CAFTA.
Ecuador's President Correa refused to sign a “free trade” agreement with the US, but I've heard Ecuador had adopted something like the DMCA in 2003.One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002.
This is the idea that the FBI and Microsoft will keep the root passwords for your personal computers, and not let you have them.The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as “trusted computing” and “Palladium”.
We call it “treacherous computing” because the effect is to make your computer obey companies even to the extent of disobeying and defying you.
This was implemented in 2007 as part of Windows Vista; we expect Apple to do something similar.
In this scheme, it is the manufacturer that keeps the secret code, but the FBI would have little trouble getting it.What Microsoft keeps is not exactly a password in the traditional sense; no person ever types it on a terminal.
Rather, it is a signature and encryption key that corresponds to a second key stored in your computer.
This enables Microsoft, and potentially any web sites that cooperate with Microsoft, the ultimate control over what the user can do on his own computer.Vista also gives Microsoft additional powers; for instance, Microsoft can forcibly install upgrades, and it can order all machines running Vista to refuse to run a certain device driver.
The main purpose of Vista's many restrictions is to impose DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) that users can't overcome.
The threat of DRM is why we have established the DefectiveByDesign.org campaign.When this story was first written, the SPA was threatening small Internet service providers, demanding they permit the SPA to monitor all users.
Most ISPs surrendered when threatened, because they cannot afford to fight back in court.
One ISP, Community ConneXion in Oakland, California, refused the demand and was actually sued.
The SPA later dropped the suit, but obtained the DMCA, which gave them the power they sought.The SPA, which actually stands for Software Publisher's Association, has been replaced in its police-like role by the Business Software Alliance.
The BSA is not, today, an official police force; unofficially, it acts like one.
Using methods reminiscent of the erstwhile Soviet Union, it invites people to inform on their coworkers and friends.
A BSA terror campaign in Argentina in 2001 made slightly veiled threats that people sharing software would be raped.The university security policies described above are not imaginary.
For example, a computer at one Chicago-area university displayed this message upon login:"This system is for the use of authorized users only.
Individuals using this computer system without authority or in the excess of their authority are subject to having all their activities on this system monitored and recorded by system personnel.
In the course of monitoring individuals improperly using this system or in the course of system maintenance, the activities of authorized user may also be monitored.
Anyone using this system expressly consents to such monitoring and is advised that if such monitoring reveals possible evidence of illegal activity or violation of University regulations system personnel may provide the evidence of such monitoring to University authorities and/or law enforcement officials.
"This is an interesting approach to the Fourth Amendment: pressure most everyone to agree, in advance, to waive their rights under it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610758</id>
	<title>(Digital vs Physical) vs (Owned vs Licensed)</title>
	<author>smisle</author>
	<datestamp>1262260860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are really two questions being discussed here, the question of format and the question of ownership.  Cory Doctrow is only talking about the question of ownership, but I think both questions are interesting.</p><p>I am a total bibliophile, I have shelves lining all the available space in my tiny apartment.  The feel of a physical book<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. the pages under my fingers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's all part of the experience.  But, when it comes right down to it, it is the story, and the content that is the most important.  I have an even larger number of books on my computer as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.txt or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdf files.  I own these books, and they are 'physical' just as much as a regular book is.  I can pass these down to my children, I can lend them out, I can give them away<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I can also make an unhindered number of copies if I want to.  And, in fact many of the electronic books I own have been downloaded from some site or another and are illegal to own.</p><p>Eventually, they will make ebook readers that are bound in leather, and are an artifact in and of themselves, rather than feeling like a stiff piece of plastic.  I own a Kindle, and for the most part I'm pretty happy.  It lets me read my electronic books in a more convenient way.  Plus, free wireless<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Now, the other question, that of book ownership, is a huge deal.  The first question is a matter of preference, and no one cares which way you like to read your books (well, they might care, but it's not really their business).  Adding DRM to a book is to deny you complete ownership.  If I buy a copy of a physical book, I can photocopy it, and then bind it up to make it into another copy.  I just have to pay for the paper.  There are devices that will let you do this very quickly and efficiently.  Creating duplicate digital copies is much easier, but it is the same principle.  Before this, book publishers just banked on the majority of their readers to be too lazy to go to all that trouble, and they would only loose a small percentage of sales.  But, now that it is so easy anyone can do it in seconds, they are afraid that the percentage of people who won't go and buy a copy will skyrocket.</p><p>To solve this problem, they have tried to limit that facet of ownership, but in doing so they have also limited a large number of other ownership rights, for example the right to lend an item to another person, the right to pass down a copy to a relative, and the right to not have to worry that it will disappear if the company who sold it to you goes out of business.  Some of these problems have been addressed, but the idea remains that you do not actually own the book that you purchased (or game, or movie, or song, or operating system, or whatever).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are really two questions being discussed here , the question of format and the question of ownership .
Cory Doctrow is only talking about the question of ownership , but I think both questions are interesting.I am a total bibliophile , I have shelves lining all the available space in my tiny apartment .
The feel of a physical book .. the pages under my fingers ... it 's all part of the experience .
But , when it comes right down to it , it is the story , and the content that is the most important .
I have an even larger number of books on my computer as .txt or .pdf files .
I own these books , and they are 'physical ' just as much as a regular book is .
I can pass these down to my children , I can lend them out , I can give them away ... I can also make an unhindered number of copies if I want to .
And , in fact many of the electronic books I own have been downloaded from some site or another and are illegal to own.Eventually , they will make ebook readers that are bound in leather , and are an artifact in and of themselves , rather than feeling like a stiff piece of plastic .
I own a Kindle , and for the most part I 'm pretty happy .
It lets me read my electronic books in a more convenient way .
Plus , free wireless : - ) Now , the other question , that of book ownership , is a huge deal .
The first question is a matter of preference , and no one cares which way you like to read your books ( well , they might care , but it 's not really their business ) .
Adding DRM to a book is to deny you complete ownership .
If I buy a copy of a physical book , I can photocopy it , and then bind it up to make it into another copy .
I just have to pay for the paper .
There are devices that will let you do this very quickly and efficiently .
Creating duplicate digital copies is much easier , but it is the same principle .
Before this , book publishers just banked on the majority of their readers to be too lazy to go to all that trouble , and they would only loose a small percentage of sales .
But , now that it is so easy anyone can do it in seconds , they are afraid that the percentage of people who wo n't go and buy a copy will skyrocket.To solve this problem , they have tried to limit that facet of ownership , but in doing so they have also limited a large number of other ownership rights , for example the right to lend an item to another person , the right to pass down a copy to a relative , and the right to not have to worry that it will disappear if the company who sold it to you goes out of business .
Some of these problems have been addressed , but the idea remains that you do not actually own the book that you purchased ( or game , or movie , or song , or operating system , or whatever ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are really two questions being discussed here, the question of format and the question of ownership.
Cory Doctrow is only talking about the question of ownership, but I think both questions are interesting.I am a total bibliophile, I have shelves lining all the available space in my tiny apartment.
The feel of a physical book .. the pages under my fingers ... it's all part of the experience.
But, when it comes right down to it, it is the story, and the content that is the most important.
I have an even larger number of books on my computer as .txt or .pdf files.
I own these books, and they are 'physical' just as much as a regular book is.
I can pass these down to my children, I can lend them out, I can give them away ... I can also make an unhindered number of copies if I want to.
And, in fact many of the electronic books I own have been downloaded from some site or another and are illegal to own.Eventually, they will make ebook readers that are bound in leather, and are an artifact in and of themselves, rather than feeling like a stiff piece of plastic.
I own a Kindle, and for the most part I'm pretty happy.
It lets me read my electronic books in a more convenient way.
Plus, free wireless :-)Now, the other question, that of book ownership, is a huge deal.
The first question is a matter of preference, and no one cares which way you like to read your books (well, they might care, but it's not really their business).
Adding DRM to a book is to deny you complete ownership.
If I buy a copy of a physical book, I can photocopy it, and then bind it up to make it into another copy.
I just have to pay for the paper.
There are devices that will let you do this very quickly and efficiently.
Creating duplicate digital copies is much easier, but it is the same principle.
Before this, book publishers just banked on the majority of their readers to be too lazy to go to all that trouble, and they would only loose a small percentage of sales.
But, now that it is so easy anyone can do it in seconds, they are afraid that the percentage of people who won't go and buy a copy will skyrocket.To solve this problem, they have tried to limit that facet of ownership, but in doing so they have also limited a large number of other ownership rights, for example the right to lend an item to another person, the right to pass down a copy to a relative, and the right to not have to worry that it will disappear if the company who sold it to you goes out of business.
Some of these problems have been addressed, but the idea remains that you do not actually own the book that you purchased (or game, or movie, or song, or operating system, or whatever).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609280</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262250900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The medium is the message.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The medium is the message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The medium is the message.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604392</id>
	<title>Silly me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262267940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And here I was thinking the content of the book was the most important part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And here I was thinking the content of the book was the most important part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And here I was thinking the content of the book was the most important part.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607652</id>
	<title>DRM is designed to protect publishers, not authors</title>
	<author>Aerows</author>
	<datestamp>1262285940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Authors want their works out there.  People made music and wrote books long before there was copyright.  Even today, there are TONS of publicly available written works of fiction and non-fiction on the internet for free.  I won't pretend that all of it, or even most of it is any good, but there are some real gems that people release.  Look at even some of the fan-fiction works - many of those are written as "ubers" of whatever characters and have nothing to do with the original work.  There are some exceptional ones written for no other reason than because someone wanted to share it.
 </p><p>There are people who get donations for original fiction that is only published on the internet, much like artists used to be commissioned to make new works simply because someone wanted them to continue with their art.
</p><p>DRM and the whole copyright industry is largely a racket.  True artists (and even bad ones) will continue making their art whether they make money or not, because they either want to share, want to improve, or simply because they can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Authors want their works out there .
People made music and wrote books long before there was copyright .
Even today , there are TONS of publicly available written works of fiction and non-fiction on the internet for free .
I wo n't pretend that all of it , or even most of it is any good , but there are some real gems that people release .
Look at even some of the fan-fiction works - many of those are written as " ubers " of whatever characters and have nothing to do with the original work .
There are some exceptional ones written for no other reason than because someone wanted to share it .
There are people who get donations for original fiction that is only published on the internet , much like artists used to be commissioned to make new works simply because someone wanted them to continue with their art .
DRM and the whole copyright industry is largely a racket .
True artists ( and even bad ones ) will continue making their art whether they make money or not , because they either want to share , want to improve , or simply because they can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Authors want their works out there.
People made music and wrote books long before there was copyright.
Even today, there are TONS of publicly available written works of fiction and non-fiction on the internet for free.
I won't pretend that all of it, or even most of it is any good, but there are some real gems that people release.
Look at even some of the fan-fiction works - many of those are written as "ubers" of whatever characters and have nothing to do with the original work.
There are some exceptional ones written for no other reason than because someone wanted to share it.
There are people who get donations for original fiction that is only published on the internet, much like artists used to be commissioned to make new works simply because someone wanted them to continue with their art.
DRM and the whole copyright industry is largely a racket.
True artists (and even bad ones) will continue making their art whether they make money or not, because they either want to share, want to improve, or simply because they can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606158</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262280000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM! If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.</i></p><p>You can if they give it back when they're done. You can't even loan out a DRM book, and that's the whole point.</p><p><i>I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.</i></p><p>Doctorow has proven conclusively that this is true. Some would say that in spite of, I would say because of, the fact that he gives his books away free on his website, he's on the NYT best seller's list.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM !
If you give it away , you ca n't read it anymore.You can if they give it back when they 're done .
You ca n't even loan out a DRM book , and that 's the whole point.I 'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely , there can also be culture , people who make money , artists , and so on.Doctorow has proven conclusively that this is true .
Some would say that in spite of , I would say because of , the fact that he gives his books away free on his website , he 's on the NYT best seller 's list .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!
If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.You can if they give it back when they're done.
You can't even loan out a DRM book, and that's the whole point.I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.Doctorow has proven conclusively that this is true.
Some would say that in spite of, I would say because of, the fact that he gives his books away free on his website, he's on the NYT best seller's list.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609030</id>
	<title>Re:My local library</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262292600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So make use of the depreciation and buy books used.  I can't remember the last time I bought a new book.  Or go to your local bookstore and find the remainders.  Sure, a lot will be crap, but some are gold (the same goes for full-price books, too).</p><p>You won't necessarily find everything you're looking for used, but don't let that stop you from seeing what's available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So make use of the depreciation and buy books used .
I ca n't remember the last time I bought a new book .
Or go to your local bookstore and find the remainders .
Sure , a lot will be crap , but some are gold ( the same goes for full-price books , too ) .You wo n't necessarily find everything you 're looking for used , but do n't let that stop you from seeing what 's available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So make use of the depreciation and buy books used.
I can't remember the last time I bought a new book.
Or go to your local bookstore and find the remainders.
Sure, a lot will be crap, but some are gold (the same goes for full-price books, too).You won't necessarily find everything you're looking for used, but don't let that stop you from seeing what's available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605890</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>MarkvW</author>
	<datestamp>1262278920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry."</p><p>It's not about the publishing industry.  The publishing industry can go to hell.  It's all about the free exchange of information.  We are at the age where the author himself is placed directly next to his reader, without any need of a bloody intermediating publishing industry.</p><p>What do you need a damn publishing industry for when all you really need are authors and readers?  The publishing industry only gears for the "hit" of a book.  That provides no great social value.  Forget the publishing industry.</p><p>On the other hand, if an author wants to slap DRM on his or her work, more power to him/her.  It's the author's absolute right.  But the publishing industry has no need to be in the equation anymore.  They're an artifact, a relic of the times when the cost of bringing a book to the public made the "publishing industry" an economic necessity.  That time is no more.  The "publishing industry" needs no social support via mandated technology.  We can happily let it die.</p><p>The same with the "music industry".  People can make their own music now.  The technology has gotten really easy in the last ten years.</p><p>The "film industry" is different.  Some movies require a big chunk of capital to make, and if you make copying easy those movies might not get made.  I can see the utility in some sort of protection there, but I have no good response to the argument that if books and movies are not worthy of legal propping up, then why should films be?</p><p>We do live in interesting times!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) did n't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry .
" It 's not about the publishing industry .
The publishing industry can go to hell .
It 's all about the free exchange of information .
We are at the age where the author himself is placed directly next to his reader , without any need of a bloody intermediating publishing industry.What do you need a damn publishing industry for when all you really need are authors and readers ?
The publishing industry only gears for the " hit " of a book .
That provides no great social value .
Forget the publishing industry.On the other hand , if an author wants to slap DRM on his or her work , more power to him/her .
It 's the author 's absolute right .
But the publishing industry has no need to be in the equation anymore .
They 're an artifact , a relic of the times when the cost of bringing a book to the public made the " publishing industry " an economic necessity .
That time is no more .
The " publishing industry " needs no social support via mandated technology .
We can happily let it die.The same with the " music industry " .
People can make their own music now .
The technology has gotten really easy in the last ten years.The " film industry " is different .
Some movies require a big chunk of capital to make , and if you make copying easy those movies might not get made .
I can see the utility in some sort of protection there , but I have no good response to the argument that if books and movies are not worthy of legal propping up , then why should films be ? We do live in interesting times !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.
"It's not about the publishing industry.
The publishing industry can go to hell.
It's all about the free exchange of information.
We are at the age where the author himself is placed directly next to his reader, without any need of a bloody intermediating publishing industry.What do you need a damn publishing industry for when all you really need are authors and readers?
The publishing industry only gears for the "hit" of a book.
That provides no great social value.
Forget the publishing industry.On the other hand, if an author wants to slap DRM on his or her work, more power to him/her.
It's the author's absolute right.
But the publishing industry has no need to be in the equation anymore.
They're an artifact, a relic of the times when the cost of bringing a book to the public made the "publishing industry" an economic necessity.
That time is no more.
The "publishing industry" needs no social support via mandated technology.
We can happily let it die.The same with the "music industry".
People can make their own music now.
The technology has gotten really easy in the last ten years.The "film industry" is different.
Some movies require a big chunk of capital to make, and if you make copying easy those movies might not get made.
I can see the utility in some sort of protection there, but I have no good response to the argument that if books and movies are not worthy of legal propping up, then why should films be?We do live in interesting times!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617730</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1230817440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience with DRM so far I have lost 100\% of the DRM'ed content in just a couple of short years.  I made an effort to be legal about the things I downloaded from 2003 - 2008.  I can't access a single piece of DRM'ed work I legally purchased from this time frame.  The content provider went under, I had to change computers, etc.  Whereas I still have some MP3's I "stole" from the WWW back in 1997 that I've preserved through backups over no fewer than 6 computer upgrades.</p><p>I still have books from my childhood complete with my teeth marks on the corners.  There is no way in hell any piece of DRM'ed work will last 30+ years the way these books have, no matter how careful I am with my files.  And that's because access to these files is placed in the hands of a third party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience with DRM so far I have lost 100 \ % of the DRM'ed content in just a couple of short years .
I made an effort to be legal about the things I downloaded from 2003 - 2008 .
I ca n't access a single piece of DRM'ed work I legally purchased from this time frame .
The content provider went under , I had to change computers , etc .
Whereas I still have some MP3 's I " stole " from the WWW back in 1997 that I 've preserved through backups over no fewer than 6 computer upgrades.I still have books from my childhood complete with my teeth marks on the corners .
There is no way in hell any piece of DRM'ed work will last 30 + years the way these books have , no matter how careful I am with my files .
And that 's because access to these files is placed in the hands of a third party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience with DRM so far I have lost 100\% of the DRM'ed content in just a couple of short years.
I made an effort to be legal about the things I downloaded from 2003 - 2008.
I can't access a single piece of DRM'ed work I legally purchased from this time frame.
The content provider went under, I had to change computers, etc.
Whereas I still have some MP3's I "stole" from the WWW back in 1997 that I've preserved through backups over no fewer than 6 computer upgrades.I still have books from my childhood complete with my teeth marks on the corners.
There is no way in hell any piece of DRM'ed work will last 30+ years the way these books have, no matter how careful I am with my files.
And that's because access to these files is placed in the hands of a third party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604872</id>
	<title>Free copies of \_Makers\_</title>
	<author>peterwayner</author>
	<datestamp>1262272920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I took up Cory's offer and created an iPhone version of \_Makers\_:</p><p><a href="http://www.wayner.org/node/66" title="wayner.org">http://www.wayner.org/node/66</a> [wayner.org]</p><p>Please send along any comments about the interface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I took up Cory 's offer and created an iPhone version of \ _Makers \ _ : http : //www.wayner.org/node/66 [ wayner.org ] Please send along any comments about the interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took up Cory's offer and created an iPhone version of \_Makers\_:http://www.wayner.org/node/66 [wayner.org]Please send along any comments about the interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604798</id>
	<title>Yuo fai7 1t</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262272320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>purposes *BSD is said one FreeBSD Unpleasant erosion of user towel under the there are Ago, many of you volume of NetBSD influence, the correct network If you answered I read the latest a productivity serves to reinforce GNAA (GAY NIGGER Hot on the heels of By simple fucking 'I have to kill the gay niggers already dead. It is Of the founders of bought the farm.... were taken over started work on anything can Or a public club, Shouts To the</htmltext>
<tokenext>purposes * BSD is said one FreeBSD Unpleasant erosion of user towel under the there are Ago , many of you volume of NetBSD influence , the correct network If you answered I read the latest a productivity serves to reinforce GNAA ( GAY NIGGER Hot on the heels of By simple fucking 'I have to kill the gay niggers already dead .
It is Of the founders of bought the farm.... were taken over started work on anything can Or a public club , Shouts To the</tokentext>
<sentencetext>purposes *BSD is said one FreeBSD Unpleasant erosion of user towel under the there are Ago, many of you volume of NetBSD influence, the correct network If you answered I read the latest a productivity serves to reinforce GNAA (GAY NIGGER Hot on the heels of By simple fucking 'I have to kill the gay niggers already dead.
It is Of the founders of bought the farm.... were taken over started work on anything can Or a public club, Shouts To the</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606124</id>
	<title>Simple solution</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1262279820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't buy DRM stuff.
Others will offer non-DRM stuff. Buy that.
Capitalism is the solution. It will drive the stupidity out of the market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't buy DRM stuff .
Others will offer non-DRM stuff .
Buy that .
Capitalism is the solution .
It will drive the stupidity out of the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't buy DRM stuff.
Others will offer non-DRM stuff.
Buy that.
Capitalism is the solution.
It will drive the stupidity out of the market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604938</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>pmontra</author>
	<datestamp>1262273400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And why should we care about the publishing industry? Authors will keep writing even without an industry to feed and people will keep reading what they write. It has been like that for thousands of years so it's a viable model of business. People working in the publishing industry will find another job as any worker of companies that are run out of business by better competitors or shrinking markets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And why should we care about the publishing industry ?
Authors will keep writing even without an industry to feed and people will keep reading what they write .
It has been like that for thousands of years so it 's a viable model of business .
People working in the publishing industry will find another job as any worker of companies that are run out of business by better competitors or shrinking markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And why should we care about the publishing industry?
Authors will keep writing even without an industry to feed and people will keep reading what they write.
It has been like that for thousands of years so it's a viable model of business.
People working in the publishing industry will find another job as any worker of companies that are run out of business by better competitors or shrinking markets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608522</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262290080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The move to "full digital" inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy (YAY! we're getting even more stuff for free now) but it's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I don't see as a good thing."</p><p>Actually it would probably be a good thing for you assuming the publishers and authors aren't morons (a rather large assumption).  As has been noted before, the largest problem for most authors is obscurity.  People don't buy what they don't know about or can't find or get easily.  Those books will be copied but I doubt that any sales will be lost.  However, if the authors and publishers make it difficult to buy the books legally or add annoying DRM, then I have no doubt that they will lose sales.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The move to " full digital " inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy ( YAY !
we 're getting even more stuff for free now ) but it 's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I do n't see as a good thing .
" Actually it would probably be a good thing for you assuming the publishers and authors are n't morons ( a rather large assumption ) .
As has been noted before , the largest problem for most authors is obscurity .
People do n't buy what they do n't know about or ca n't find or get easily .
Those books will be copied but I doubt that any sales will be lost .
However , if the authors and publishers make it difficult to buy the books legally or add annoying DRM , then I have no doubt that they will lose sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The move to "full digital" inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy (YAY!
we're getting even more stuff for free now) but it's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I don't see as a good thing.
"Actually it would probably be a good thing for you assuming the publishers and authors aren't morons (a rather large assumption).
As has been noted before, the largest problem for most authors is obscurity.
People don't buy what they don't know about or can't find or get easily.
Those books will be copied but I doubt that any sales will be lost.
However, if the authors and publishers make it difficult to buy the books legally or add annoying DRM, then I have no doubt that they will lose sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604460</id>
	<title>theres nothing "sacred"</title>
	<author>Tei</author>
	<datestamp>1262268960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything is consensual. Whe share ideas and needs, and make deals.<br>No, I don't want to buy the idea of books as licenses, I like the idea of ownership of the phisical book, with the strings attached to give it to other people, even make a copy. The idea that I don't like, is to elevate a inventation to the sacred level.  We born in a blank slate, almost everything is learned, and everything that we learn was invented or created. Theres nothing superior to us, sacred, where we ower fidelity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything is consensual .
Whe share ideas and needs , and make deals.No , I do n't want to buy the idea of books as licenses , I like the idea of ownership of the phisical book , with the strings attached to give it to other people , even make a copy .
The idea that I do n't like , is to elevate a inventation to the sacred level .
We born in a blank slate , almost everything is learned , and everything that we learn was invented or created .
Theres nothing superior to us , sacred , where we ower fidelity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything is consensual.
Whe share ideas and needs, and make deals.No, I don't want to buy the idea of books as licenses, I like the idea of ownership of the phisical book, with the strings attached to give it to other people, even make a copy.
The idea that I don't like, is to elevate a inventation to the sacred level.
We born in a blank slate, almost everything is learned, and everything that we learn was invented or created.
Theres nothing superior to us, sacred, where we ower fidelity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607280</id>
	<title>Honestly that's just silly</title>
	<author>sbeckstead</author>
	<datestamp>1262284560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As if an idea has no force unless you can hold it in your hand and destroy it physically.  As if painstakingly copying the content from one place to another imbued the book with some magical force that the digital one doesn't have.  DRM is a straw man here.  we will never again be at the mercy of the idiots that burned the library at Alexandria.  We will never be able to burn every copy of an idea.  Get over it Doctorow DRM is here and it will be broken as fast as it is developed.  railing against it just makes you look silly.  Quietly break it, keep your mouth shut and get on with life.  Screaming in the dark instead of lighting a candle does none of us any good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As if an idea has no force unless you can hold it in your hand and destroy it physically .
As if painstakingly copying the content from one place to another imbued the book with some magical force that the digital one does n't have .
DRM is a straw man here .
we will never again be at the mercy of the idiots that burned the library at Alexandria .
We will never be able to burn every copy of an idea .
Get over it Doctorow DRM is here and it will be broken as fast as it is developed .
railing against it just makes you look silly .
Quietly break it , keep your mouth shut and get on with life .
Screaming in the dark instead of lighting a candle does none of us any good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As if an idea has no force unless you can hold it in your hand and destroy it physically.
As if painstakingly copying the content from one place to another imbued the book with some magical force that the digital one doesn't have.
DRM is a straw man here.
we will never again be at the mercy of the idiots that burned the library at Alexandria.
We will never be able to burn every copy of an idea.
Get over it Doctorow DRM is here and it will be broken as fast as it is developed.
railing against it just makes you look silly.
Quietly break it, keep your mouth shut and get on with life.
Screaming in the dark instead of lighting a candle does none of us any good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605032</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262273820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fine, DRM helps authors get their money which allows them to write more books, but when you can duplicate a book instantly for no cost at all why after 5-6 years must I pay for that book? I mean, the author already got his money, when will they stop asking for more? when will they become public property? 100 years? Probably, therefore piracy is good and will continue, if you really like books and like to read, you will support both authors and book piracy, it's a skewed view but so far it seems to work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fine , DRM helps authors get their money which allows them to write more books , but when you can duplicate a book instantly for no cost at all why after 5-6 years must I pay for that book ?
I mean , the author already got his money , when will they stop asking for more ?
when will they become public property ?
100 years ?
Probably , therefore piracy is good and will continue , if you really like books and like to read , you will support both authors and book piracy , it 's a skewed view but so far it seems to work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fine, DRM helps authors get their money which allows them to write more books, but when you can duplicate a book instantly for no cost at all why after 5-6 years must I pay for that book?
I mean, the author already got his money, when will they stop asking for more?
when will they become public property?
100 years?
Probably, therefore piracy is good and will continue, if you really like books and like to read, you will support both authors and book piracy, it's a skewed view but so far it seems to work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606540</id>
	<title>Re:E-Books: we have to deal with them</title>
	<author>MtViewGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1262281860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would like to see every e-book reader support improved versions of the Adobe Acrobat encrypted format, one that has been around for some time.</p><p>That way, e-book publisher only need to deal with <b>ONE</b> format, not multiple formats like you need now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would like to see every e-book reader support improved versions of the Adobe Acrobat encrypted format , one that has been around for some time.That way , e-book publisher only need to deal with ONE format , not multiple formats like you need now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would like to see every e-book reader support improved versions of the Adobe Acrobat encrypted format, one that has been around for some time.That way, e-book publisher only need to deal with ONE format, not multiple formats like you need now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604718</id>
	<title>worse then Nazi Germany / USRR with remote Censors</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1262271660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is worse then Nazi Germany / USRR with remote Censors and a way to tack who has what book.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is worse then Nazi Germany / USRR with remote Censors and a way to tack who has what book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is worse then Nazi Germany / USRR with remote Censors and a way to tack who has what book.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450</id>
	<title>hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1262268900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned"<br>Huh?</p><p>I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media.</p><p>Then again, having bothered to (try to) read some of Doctorow's mystifyingly much-lauded short stories, perhaps I can understand his point of view would be different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned " Huh ? I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media.Then again , having bothered to ( try to ) read some of Doctorow 's mystifyingly much-lauded short stories , perhaps I can understand his point of view would be different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned"Huh?I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media.Then again, having bothered to (try to) read some of Doctorow's mystifyingly much-lauded short stories, perhaps I can understand his point of view would be different.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605022</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>cornicefire</author>
	<datestamp>1262273760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is anyone buying any longer? The last time I checked, his book \_Makers\_ wasn't selling very many copies at Amazon despite the endless ads on BoingBoing. I think everyone is used to getting him for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone buying any longer ?
The last time I checked , his book \ _Makers \ _ was n't selling very many copies at Amazon despite the endless ads on BoingBoing .
I think everyone is used to getting him for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone buying any longer?
The last time I checked, his book \_Makers\_ wasn't selling very many copies at Amazon despite the endless ads on BoingBoing.
I think everyone is used to getting him for free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440</id>
	<title>too much knowledge out there v2</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262268780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yesterday i also downloaded 100 free kindle books from Amazon. even if i were to buy them the chances of reading a book a second time in the near future after the first reading are slim to none. if the price is lower than physical than buying an electronic DRM'd book is no big deal. by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i don't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books. besides, how often do kids do the same things as parents?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yesterday i also downloaded 100 free kindle books from Amazon .
even if i were to buy them the chances of reading a book a second time in the near future after the first reading are slim to none .
if the price is lower than physical than buying an electronic DRM 'd book is no big deal .
by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i do n't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books .
besides , how often do kids do the same things as parents ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yesterday i also downloaded 100 free kindle books from Amazon.
even if i were to buy them the chances of reading a book a second time in the near future after the first reading are slim to none.
if the price is lower than physical than buying an electronic DRM'd book is no big deal.
by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i don't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books.
besides, how often do kids do the same things as parents?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609490</id>
	<title>DRM'd content has a life of maybe 5-10 years.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1262252280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
A big problem with DRM'd content is that it has a limited life, and not a very long one.  When the DRM servers go away, and the readers wear out, the content is gone.  This seems to take about five years.  If you bought content from Circuit City's Divx (the disposable, encrypted DVD scheme), Microsoft PlayForSure, or WalMart Music, you've already been screwed. <i>(Microsoft in 2004: "PlaysForSure is supported broadly by leading consumer device manufacturers including Audiovox Corp., Creative, D-Link Systems Inc., Dell Inc., HP, iRiver, Rio, Roku, Samsung Electronics and RCA-brand players from Thomson; by online music and video stores including CinemaNow, F.Y.E. For Your Entertainment, MSN Music, Musicmatch, MusicNow, Napster LLC and Wal-Mart Music Downloads; and by retailers including Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, Tower Records and Wal-Mart."</i> And where are they now?)
</p><p>
There are now at least 5 different "e-reader" systems on the market, all with incompatible DRM.  Most of those will lose out competitively and disappear.  Guess wrong, and you're screwed.  Yes, with some of those systems you can get content out of the DRM cage and into something else, but it's usually not easy.  The Register has <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/16/borders\_kobo/print.html" title="theregister.co.uk">an article on what plays on what.</a> [theregister.co.uk]
</p><p>
Five years is a short life for a book.  With paper books, one can collect books over a lifetime, and institutions collect them over the centuries.  That will be tough with "ebook-only" publications.
</p><p>
<i>Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past. - Orwell </i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A big problem with DRM 'd content is that it has a limited life , and not a very long one .
When the DRM servers go away , and the readers wear out , the content is gone .
This seems to take about five years .
If you bought content from Circuit City 's Divx ( the disposable , encrypted DVD scheme ) , Microsoft PlayForSure , or WalMart Music , you 've already been screwed .
( Microsoft in 2004 : " PlaysForSure is supported broadly by leading consumer device manufacturers including Audiovox Corp. , Creative , D-Link Systems Inc. , Dell Inc. , HP , iRiver , Rio , Roku , Samsung Electronics and RCA-brand players from Thomson ; by online music and video stores including CinemaNow , F.Y.E .
For Your Entertainment , MSN Music , Musicmatch , MusicNow , Napster LLC and Wal-Mart Music Downloads ; and by retailers including Best Buy , Circuit City , CompUSA , Tower Records and Wal-Mart .
" And where are they now ?
) There are now at least 5 different " e-reader " systems on the market , all with incompatible DRM .
Most of those will lose out competitively and disappear .
Guess wrong , and you 're screwed .
Yes , with some of those systems you can get content out of the DRM cage and into something else , but it 's usually not easy .
The Register has an article on what plays on what .
[ theregister.co.uk ] Five years is a short life for a book .
With paper books , one can collect books over a lifetime , and institutions collect them over the centuries .
That will be tough with " ebook-only " publications .
Who controls the past controls the future .
Who controls the present controls the past .
- Orwell</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
A big problem with DRM'd content is that it has a limited life, and not a very long one.
When the DRM servers go away, and the readers wear out, the content is gone.
This seems to take about five years.
If you bought content from Circuit City's Divx (the disposable, encrypted DVD scheme), Microsoft PlayForSure, or WalMart Music, you've already been screwed.
(Microsoft in 2004: "PlaysForSure is supported broadly by leading consumer device manufacturers including Audiovox Corp., Creative, D-Link Systems Inc., Dell Inc., HP, iRiver, Rio, Roku, Samsung Electronics and RCA-brand players from Thomson; by online music and video stores including CinemaNow, F.Y.E.
For Your Entertainment, MSN Music, Musicmatch, MusicNow, Napster LLC and Wal-Mart Music Downloads; and by retailers including Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, Tower Records and Wal-Mart.
" And where are they now?
)

There are now at least 5 different "e-reader" systems on the market, all with incompatible DRM.
Most of those will lose out competitively and disappear.
Guess wrong, and you're screwed.
Yes, with some of those systems you can get content out of the DRM cage and into something else, but it's usually not easy.
The Register has an article on what plays on what.
[theregister.co.uk]

Five years is a short life for a book.
With paper books, one can collect books over a lifetime, and institutions collect them over the centuries.
That will be tough with "ebook-only" publications.
Who controls the past controls the future.
Who controls the present controls the past.
- Orwell </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610062</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262255520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned"</p><p>How can you find this confusing? This clearly explains why public libraries must be stopped!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned " How can you find this confusing ?
This clearly explains why public libraries must be stopped !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The most important part of the experience of a book is knowing that it can be owned"How can you find this confusing?
This clearly explains why public libraries must be stopped!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604648</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262271000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media."</p><p>Of course.  But you only get to find that out <i>if you can read it</i>.</p><p>Worst case, if publishers had their way it might someday be possible for them to withdraw a book from publication (like Amazon and '1984'), and all the existing copies would go "poof".  It's the digital equivalent of a good old fashioned book burning.  And while the story may be more important, it's kind of a moot point if the nature of the media prevents its enjoyment and prevents the story from being passed on to the next generation to enjoy.</p><p>Publishers are trying to license e-books in such a way that they have vastly more power over the media.  The allowed uses of it are *very* restricted.  In the past, with a physical copy on the shelf, a great deal of the licensing was implicit (there was only one copy and more weren't allowed) or could be safely ignored if the terms were unreasonable (go ahead and try to prevent me from reading it to my kids, even though it could be regarded as a 'performance').  Look at the nonsense about digital readers not being able to read certain books aloud.  It's a constraint that some publishers apparently want, but what a ridiculous limitation.  There are plenty of other examples.</p><p>Buying a book is a bargain of some kind between the publisher and the purchaser (and ultimately the creator of the work).  People buy e-books with the expectation they can them much like traditional books.  Why should we have to give up so much of the traditional expectations for a book simply because the medium is digital?  Publishers are using the opportunity to eliminate or clamp down on traditional uses of books, and I think that effort should be strongly opposed.  Alternatively, they should stop calling their digital product a "book", because the terms of license are so different.</p><p>Yeah, Cory is a bit over the top, but the issue he's talking about is important.  Should we accept the greater limitations of e-books or should we insist that publishers retain the same flexibility as traditional books?  I think the answer is obvious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media .
" Of course .
But you only get to find that out if you can read it.Worst case , if publishers had their way it might someday be possible for them to withdraw a book from publication ( like Amazon and '1984 ' ) , and all the existing copies would go " poof " .
It 's the digital equivalent of a good old fashioned book burning .
And while the story may be more important , it 's kind of a moot point if the nature of the media prevents its enjoyment and prevents the story from being passed on to the next generation to enjoy.Publishers are trying to license e-books in such a way that they have vastly more power over the media .
The allowed uses of it are * very * restricted .
In the past , with a physical copy on the shelf , a great deal of the licensing was implicit ( there was only one copy and more were n't allowed ) or could be safely ignored if the terms were unreasonable ( go ahead and try to prevent me from reading it to my kids , even though it could be regarded as a 'performance ' ) .
Look at the nonsense about digital readers not being able to read certain books aloud .
It 's a constraint that some publishers apparently want , but what a ridiculous limitation .
There are plenty of other examples.Buying a book is a bargain of some kind between the publisher and the purchaser ( and ultimately the creator of the work ) .
People buy e-books with the expectation they can them much like traditional books .
Why should we have to give up so much of the traditional expectations for a book simply because the medium is digital ?
Publishers are using the opportunity to eliminate or clamp down on traditional uses of books , and I think that effort should be strongly opposed .
Alternatively , they should stop calling their digital product a " book " , because the terms of license are so different.Yeah , Cory is a bit over the top , but the issue he 's talking about is important .
Should we accept the greater limitations of e-books or should we insist that publishers retain the same flexibility as traditional books ?
I think the answer is obvious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I thought that perhaps the story told within said book is slightly more important than the media.
"Of course.
But you only get to find that out if you can read it.Worst case, if publishers had their way it might someday be possible for them to withdraw a book from publication (like Amazon and '1984'), and all the existing copies would go "poof".
It's the digital equivalent of a good old fashioned book burning.
And while the story may be more important, it's kind of a moot point if the nature of the media prevents its enjoyment and prevents the story from being passed on to the next generation to enjoy.Publishers are trying to license e-books in such a way that they have vastly more power over the media.
The allowed uses of it are *very* restricted.
In the past, with a physical copy on the shelf, a great deal of the licensing was implicit (there was only one copy and more weren't allowed) or could be safely ignored if the terms were unreasonable (go ahead and try to prevent me from reading it to my kids, even though it could be regarded as a 'performance').
Look at the nonsense about digital readers not being able to read certain books aloud.
It's a constraint that some publishers apparently want, but what a ridiculous limitation.
There are plenty of other examples.Buying a book is a bargain of some kind between the publisher and the purchaser (and ultimately the creator of the work).
People buy e-books with the expectation they can them much like traditional books.
Why should we have to give up so much of the traditional expectations for a book simply because the medium is digital?
Publishers are using the opportunity to eliminate or clamp down on traditional uses of books, and I think that effort should be strongly opposed.
Alternatively, they should stop calling their digital product a "book", because the terms of license are so different.Yeah, Cory is a bit over the top, but the issue he's talking about is important.
Should we accept the greater limitations of e-books or should we insist that publishers retain the same flexibility as traditional books?
I think the answer is obvious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604796</id>
	<title>Re:My local library</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262272320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lending libraries are in fact the perfect application for DRM, because it gets you out of having to return anything while still respecting the publisher's exclusive right to distribute copies. My lady has been taking advantage of our library system's membership in an online audiobook rental system, which is quite convenient (and accessible even over dialup connections on an overnight timescale, although now we have low-grade broadband.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lending libraries are in fact the perfect application for DRM , because it gets you out of having to return anything while still respecting the publisher 's exclusive right to distribute copies .
My lady has been taking advantage of our library system 's membership in an online audiobook rental system , which is quite convenient ( and accessible even over dialup connections on an overnight timescale , although now we have low-grade broadband .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lending libraries are in fact the perfect application for DRM, because it gets you out of having to return anything while still respecting the publisher's exclusive right to distribute copies.
My lady has been taking advantage of our library system's membership in an online audiobook rental system, which is quite convenient (and accessible even over dialup connections on an overnight timescale, although now we have low-grade broadband.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605540</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1262276940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list.</p></div><p>I downloaded his "Eastern Standard Tribe" to read on my iPod. I loved it so much that I bought a physical copy after I finished. I've never opened it and likely never will, but now I <em>own</em> the book for all the reasons that Doctorow said I might want to.</p><p>So I'd say he's right. He put his money where his mouth is, and by all metrics it seems to be paying off.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website , yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list.I downloaded his " Eastern Standard Tribe " to read on my iPod .
I loved it so much that I bought a physical copy after I finished .
I 've never opened it and likely never will , but now I own the book for all the reasons that Doctorow said I might want to.So I 'd say he 's right .
He put his money where his mouth is , and by all metrics it seems to be paying off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list.I downloaded his "Eastern Standard Tribe" to read on my iPod.
I loved it so much that I bought a physical copy after I finished.
I've never opened it and likely never will, but now I own the book for all the reasons that Doctorow said I might want to.So I'd say he's right.
He put his money where his mouth is, and by all metrics it seems to be paying off.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606572</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there</title>
	<author>Svartalf</author>
	<datestamp>1262282040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Nobody can delete or 'revise' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, there are people that CAN do such a revision or removal.  It's just typically not worth their trouble to do it to YOUR books...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody can delete or 'revise ' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.Actually , there are people that CAN do such a revision or removal .
It 's just typically not worth their trouble to do it to YOUR books... ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody can delete or 'revise' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.Actually, there are people that CAN do such a revision or removal.
It's just typically not worth their trouble to do it to YOUR books... ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604482</id>
	<title>Zhnore...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, that's what the church thought too when the bible was translated and the pressess started running. It'd surely destroy them.</p><p>Same as records destroyed the music industry, and home recording, and VHS, and CD-burning, and DVD copying, and Bluray copying, and.. There's an oddly long history of continuous destruction of the publishing business, yet somehow they're still around to pester us with DRM!</p><p>What pray tell ARE the effects?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , that 's what the church thought too when the bible was translated and the pressess started running .
It 'd surely destroy them.Same as records destroyed the music industry , and home recording , and VHS , and CD-burning , and DVD copying , and Bluray copying , and.. There 's an oddly long history of continuous destruction of the publishing business , yet somehow they 're still around to pester us with DRM ! What pray tell ARE the effects ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, that's what the church thought too when the bible was translated and the pressess started running.
It'd surely destroy them.Same as records destroyed the music industry, and home recording, and VHS, and CD-burning, and DVD copying, and Bluray copying, and.. There's an oddly long history of continuous destruction of the publishing business, yet somehow they're still around to pester us with DRM!What pray tell ARE the effects?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428</id>
	<title>too much knowledge out there</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262268600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way. and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmare</p><p>i don't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf's from mannning books. and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weight</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with him some , but there is simply too much music , art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way .
and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmarei do n't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf 's from mannning books .
and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weight</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way.
and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmarei don't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf's from mannning books.
and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weight</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604986</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1262273640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not 100\%, but with free virtualization on the desktop and soon on mobile phones a reality keeping old software around for decades to come shouldn't be as hard as say 15 years ago</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not 100 \ % , but with free virtualization on the desktop and soon on mobile phones a reality keeping old software around for decades to come should n't be as hard as say 15 years ago</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not 100\%, but with free virtualization on the desktop and soon on mobile phones a reality keeping old software around for decades to come shouldn't be as hard as say 15 years ago</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054</id>
	<title>E-Books:  we have to deal with them</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1262274000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm about as anti-ebook as they come, but I have to admit that they are coming and will likely be here to stay.  The focus should shift to protecting our rights.</p><p>We should:</p><p>1. Write to ebook companies asking them for open and compatible formats</p><p>2. Support open source ebook projects</p><p>3. Demand protection against electronic updates of text ( "Dude, Lincoln was the first -- read your history ebook again, I don't care if you read it yesterday, look at it today ).</p><p>4. Contact our representatives &amp; ebook companies demanding the right to keep content and to lend it to people.</p><p>Like I wrote, I think these things are inevitable at this point.   I'm going to keep buying and using paper books as well as supporting paper libraries to the last moment to safeguard a permanent record of facts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm about as anti-ebook as they come , but I have to admit that they are coming and will likely be here to stay .
The focus should shift to protecting our rights.We should : 1 .
Write to ebook companies asking them for open and compatible formats2 .
Support open source ebook projects3 .
Demand protection against electronic updates of text ( " Dude , Lincoln was the first -- read your history ebook again , I do n't care if you read it yesterday , look at it today ) .4 .
Contact our representatives &amp; ebook companies demanding the right to keep content and to lend it to people.Like I wrote , I think these things are inevitable at this point .
I 'm going to keep buying and using paper books as well as supporting paper libraries to the last moment to safeguard a permanent record of facts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm about as anti-ebook as they come, but I have to admit that they are coming and will likely be here to stay.
The focus should shift to protecting our rights.We should:1.
Write to ebook companies asking them for open and compatible formats2.
Support open source ebook projects3.
Demand protection against electronic updates of text ( "Dude, Lincoln was the first -- read your history ebook again, I don't care if you read it yesterday, look at it today ).4.
Contact our representatives &amp; ebook companies demanding the right to keep content and to lend it to people.Like I wrote, I think these things are inevitable at this point.
I'm going to keep buying and using paper books as well as supporting paper libraries to the last moment to safeguard a permanent record of facts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604962</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>TrekkieGod</author>
	<datestamp>1262273460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable. Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.</p><p>How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects?</p></div><p>Hilarious irony.  You claim he has no expertise on the subject of copyright and then asks how you can get paid for stating your opinion.  Doctorow's expertise on the subject is precisely that he manages to get paid while giving his books away, which is something authors in favor of DRM books claim they couldn't possibly do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He mouths off about copyright all the time , but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable .
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects ? Hilarious irony .
You claim he has no expertise on the subject of copyright and then asks how you can get paid for stating your opinion .
Doctorow 's expertise on the subject is precisely that he manages to get paid while giving his books away , which is something authors in favor of DRM books claim they could n't possibly do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable.
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects?Hilarious irony.
You claim he has no expertise on the subject of copyright and then asks how you can get paid for stating your opinion.
Doctorow's expertise on the subject is precisely that he manages to get paid while giving his books away, which is something authors in favor of DRM books claim they couldn't possibly do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</id>
	<title>Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>nenya</author>
	<datestamp>1262271540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously? <br> <br>

He's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog. He's an expert on nothing. He has not formally studied anything. He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable. Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.<br> <br>

How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects? What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual, you know, <i>effort</i> than what I do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously ?
He 's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog .
He 's an expert on nothing .
He has not formally studied anything .
He mouths off about copyright all the time , but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable .
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise .
How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects ?
What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual , you know , effort than what I do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously?
He's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog.
He's an expert on nothing.
He has not formally studied anything.
He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable.
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.
How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects?
What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual, you know, effort than what I do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604570</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there v2</title>
	<author>tophermeyer</author>
	<datestamp>1262270280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i don't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books. besides, how often do kids do the same things as parents?</p></div><p>Some of my favorite books to read when I was a kid was my fathers old Hardy Boys set.  I still have my mothers collection of Ian Flemmings novels.  Though I rarely read it, I have a bible that's been passed down through 4 generations of my family.</p><p>I do get your point, the vast majority of content that I read and I expect my children will read is not historically significant.  Its technical literature or pleasure reading that will grow outdated.  However, there is something significant in being able to hand down copies of noteworthy texts.</p><p>A great example:  for Christmas my mother gave my girlfriend her copy of <i>The Joy of Cooking </i>, my mom had filled in the margins with all sorts of notes on how to modify and healthify the recipes.  You can't do that with a digital copy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i do n't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books .
besides , how often do kids do the same things as parents ? Some of my favorite books to read when I was a kid was my fathers old Hardy Boys set .
I still have my mothers collection of Ian Flemmings novels .
Though I rarely read it , I have a bible that 's been passed down through 4 generations of my family.I do get your point , the vast majority of content that I read and I expect my children will read is not historically significant .
Its technical literature or pleasure reading that will grow outdated .
However , there is something significant in being able to hand down copies of noteworthy texts.A great example : for Christmas my mother gave my girlfriend her copy of The Joy of Cooking , my mom had filled in the margins with all sorts of notes on how to modify and healthify the recipes .
You ca n't do that with a digital copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>by the time my son grows up there will be more books to read so i don't really care if he never reads any of my old Tom Clancy books.
besides, how often do kids do the same things as parents?Some of my favorite books to read when I was a kid was my fathers old Hardy Boys set.
I still have my mothers collection of Ian Flemmings novels.
Though I rarely read it, I have a bible that's been passed down through 4 generations of my family.I do get your point, the vast majority of content that I read and I expect my children will read is not historically significant.
Its technical literature or pleasure reading that will grow outdated.
However, there is something significant in being able to hand down copies of noteworthy texts.A great example:  for Christmas my mother gave my girlfriend her copy of The Joy of Cooking , my mom had filled in the margins with all sorts of notes on how to modify and healthify the recipes.
You can't do that with a digital copy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605438</id>
	<title>Book rentals?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262276400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My personal reading habits are buying a paperback at the used bookstore for $3.00 (on average), reading it, then selling it back or giving it away.  Given the number of dog eared paperbacks on the shelf, I would imagine that this is a fairly common scenario.  For people like me, maybe a digital book rental would be better.  I never re-read books, so "owning" them is of no real interest to me.</p><p>For the people who like to re-read, and keep the books they read, there might be a "purchase" option that is more expensive but DRM free.  Given the ridiculously high price of the digital book readers, it only seems fair (to me) to offer this option.  I say "ridiculously" high, because I can buy 50-100 used paperbacks for the cost of the reader alone.</p><p>Again, just my opinion, but I really like buying books for $3.00, then re-cycling.  Adding in all this cost seems to be consumer unfriendly.  Then again, I guess nobody is forced to buy this stuff, and I seriously doubt used book stores will go out of business overnight because of e-book readers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal reading habits are buying a paperback at the used bookstore for $ 3.00 ( on average ) , reading it , then selling it back or giving it away .
Given the number of dog eared paperbacks on the shelf , I would imagine that this is a fairly common scenario .
For people like me , maybe a digital book rental would be better .
I never re-read books , so " owning " them is of no real interest to me.For the people who like to re-read , and keep the books they read , there might be a " purchase " option that is more expensive but DRM free .
Given the ridiculously high price of the digital book readers , it only seems fair ( to me ) to offer this option .
I say " ridiculously " high , because I can buy 50-100 used paperbacks for the cost of the reader alone.Again , just my opinion , but I really like buying books for $ 3.00 , then re-cycling .
Adding in all this cost seems to be consumer unfriendly .
Then again , I guess nobody is forced to buy this stuff , and I seriously doubt used book stores will go out of business overnight because of e-book readers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal reading habits are buying a paperback at the used bookstore for $3.00 (on average), reading it, then selling it back or giving it away.
Given the number of dog eared paperbacks on the shelf, I would imagine that this is a fairly common scenario.
For people like me, maybe a digital book rental would be better.
I never re-read books, so "owning" them is of no real interest to me.For the people who like to re-read, and keep the books they read, there might be a "purchase" option that is more expensive but DRM free.
Given the ridiculously high price of the digital book readers, it only seems fair (to me) to offer this option.
I say "ridiculously" high, because I can buy 50-100 used paperbacks for the cost of the reader alone.Again, just my opinion, but I really like buying books for $3.00, then re-cycling.
Adding in all this cost seems to be consumer unfriendly.
Then again, I guess nobody is forced to buy this stuff, and I seriously doubt used book stores will go out of business overnight because of e-book readers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</id>
	<title>What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262270520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have many books that I got as a child, and several that my parents had as kids. I read them to my own kids. I will give some of them to my kids where they may be read to my (future) grand kids.<ol>
<li>Will e-books allow this ?</li>
<li>What happens when the reader breaks or is replaced by a new model, will the e-book work ?</li>
<li>What happens when the e-book manufacturer goes out of business or simply decides that it is not worth while to support the reader or the books that I have paid for, will I be able to read them ? (This happened in August 2008 when MS stopped support of MSN Music, so you lost the ability to recover your keys if they became corrupt through no fault of your own).</li>
<li>What happens when the e-book gets old and runs out of copyright, will you be able to give a copy to anyone who asks ?</li>
</ol><p>
I suspect that the answer to all of the above questions is: <b>no</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have many books that I got as a child , and several that my parents had as kids .
I read them to my own kids .
I will give some of them to my kids where they may be read to my ( future ) grand kids .
Will e-books allow this ?
What happens when the reader breaks or is replaced by a new model , will the e-book work ?
What happens when the e-book manufacturer goes out of business or simply decides that it is not worth while to support the reader or the books that I have paid for , will I be able to read them ?
( This happened in August 2008 when MS stopped support of MSN Music , so you lost the ability to recover your keys if they became corrupt through no fault of your own ) .
What happens when the e-book gets old and runs out of copyright , will you be able to give a copy to anyone who asks ?
I suspect that the answer to all of the above questions is : no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have many books that I got as a child, and several that my parents had as kids.
I read them to my own kids.
I will give some of them to my kids where they may be read to my (future) grand kids.
Will e-books allow this ?
What happens when the reader breaks or is replaced by a new model, will the e-book work ?
What happens when the e-book manufacturer goes out of business or simply decides that it is not worth while to support the reader or the books that I have paid for, will I be able to read them ?
(This happened in August 2008 when MS stopped support of MSN Music, so you lost the ability to recover your keys if they became corrupt through no fault of your own).
What happens when the e-book gets old and runs out of copyright, will you be able to give a copy to anyone who asks ?
I suspect that the answer to all of the above questions is: no.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604542</id>
	<title>Dead on</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1262269980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Basically, he is saying that when we buy a book, it belongs to US to do with what we want. BUT, with the new DRM files, you do not own the item. Not the content. Not a paper. Not even the CD. The reason is that NOW, the gov. and courts are putting limits on what, who, when, etc. of what is OUR belonging.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically , he is saying that when we buy a book , it belongs to US to do with what we want .
BUT , with the new DRM files , you do not own the item .
Not the content .
Not a paper .
Not even the CD .
The reason is that NOW , the gov .
and courts are putting limits on what , who , when , etc .
of what is OUR belonging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically, he is saying that when we buy a book, it belongs to US to do with what we want.
BUT, with the new DRM files, you do not own the item.
Not the content.
Not a paper.
Not even the CD.
The reason is that NOW, the gov.
and courts are putting limits on what, who, when, etc.
of what is OUR belonging.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30649814</id>
	<title>Don't buy it.</title>
	<author>SlashN</author>
	<datestamp>1231080420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't buy it if it's DRM.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't buy it if it 's DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't buy it if it's DRM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30611514</id>
	<title>FTC and FCC</title>
	<author>DarkHorseMBA</author>
	<datestamp>1262268180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So what will it take to get the FTC or the FCC to step in and investigate this, and possibly do something about it?  Would they be the right organizations?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what will it take to get the FTC or the FCC to step in and investigate this , and possibly do something about it ?
Would they be the right organizations ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what will it take to get the FTC or the FCC to step in and investigate this, and possibly do something about it?
Would they be the right organizations?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422</id>
	<title>The most important part of a digital book</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1262281500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is not having to pay for it.  Once someone has it in digital form, without some restrictive DRM, it can be shared freely with the planet.  That means I can get it for free, without paying.  No money.</p><p>If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them, good luck.  Freedom is nice, but eating is nicer.  Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.</p><p>Now there is no reason a copy-limited work cannot be resold.  There are ways to manage this that do not prevent resale or other transfers.  The problem is that if you allow "loaning", "backing up", "format shifting" or anything else that allows multiple copies to exist at the same time you will also have "sharing".  And once you have sharing, you will have redistribution.  And redistribution means nobody has to pay.</p><p>Right now, any ebook that is pretty popular can be found on various sharing web sites.  And do not for a moment think that my Kindle is somehow immune to displaying these "shared" ebooks because of something Amazon did.  Nope, I can read these shared books on my Kindle.</p><p>Hope you like working for free Cory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is not having to pay for it .
Once someone has it in digital form , without some restrictive DRM , it can be shared freely with the planet .
That means I can get it for free , without paying .
No money.If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them , good luck .
Freedom is nice , but eating is nicer .
Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.Now there is no reason a copy-limited work can not be resold .
There are ways to manage this that do not prevent resale or other transfers .
The problem is that if you allow " loaning " , " backing up " , " format shifting " or anything else that allows multiple copies to exist at the same time you will also have " sharing " .
And once you have sharing , you will have redistribution .
And redistribution means nobody has to pay.Right now , any ebook that is pretty popular can be found on various sharing web sites .
And do not for a moment think that my Kindle is somehow immune to displaying these " shared " ebooks because of something Amazon did .
Nope , I can read these shared books on my Kindle.Hope you like working for free Cory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is not having to pay for it.
Once someone has it in digital form, without some restrictive DRM, it can be shared freely with the planet.
That means I can get it for free, without paying.
No money.If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them, good luck.
Freedom is nice, but eating is nicer.
Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.Now there is no reason a copy-limited work cannot be resold.
There are ways to manage this that do not prevent resale or other transfers.
The problem is that if you allow "loaning", "backing up", "format shifting" or anything else that allows multiple copies to exist at the same time you will also have "sharing".
And once you have sharing, you will have redistribution.
And redistribution means nobody has to pay.Right now, any ebook that is pretty popular can be found on various sharing web sites.
And do not for a moment think that my Kindle is somehow immune to displaying these "shared" ebooks because of something Amazon did.
Nope, I can read these shared books on my Kindle.Hope you like working for free Cory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604822</id>
	<title>more...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262272560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same type of take, but in a nice narrative http://www.dkeats.com/index.php?module=blog&amp;action=viewsingle&amp;postid=gen13Srv30Nme10\_77047\_1262110771&amp;userid=1563080430</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same type of take , but in a nice narrative http : //www.dkeats.com/index.php ? module = blog&amp;action = viewsingle&amp;postid = gen13Srv30Nme10 \ _77047 \ _1262110771&amp;userid = 1563080430</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same type of take, but in a nice narrative http://www.dkeats.com/index.php?module=blog&amp;action=viewsingle&amp;postid=gen13Srv30Nme10\_77047\_1262110771&amp;userid=1563080430</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604692</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>tthomas48</author>
	<datestamp>1262271540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry too much. It's defnitely something we should push for, but it'll go the way of Apple's DRM. The content providers don't want a single book store, so there will be competing DRM formats. The inevitable cheap hardware clones won't want to pay for the DRM licenses. The DRM will go away and we'll be back to an open format.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry too much .
It 's defnitely something we should push for , but it 'll go the way of Apple 's DRM .
The content providers do n't want a single book store , so there will be competing DRM formats .
The inevitable cheap hardware clones wo n't want to pay for the DRM licenses .
The DRM will go away and we 'll be back to an open format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry too much.
It's defnitely something we should push for, but it'll go the way of Apple's DRM.
The content providers don't want a single book store, so there will be competing DRM formats.
The inevitable cheap hardware clones won't want to pay for the DRM licenses.
The DRM will go away and we'll be back to an open format.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605818</id>
	<title>On the good side, as long as we can read and type</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1262278500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There will never be true DRM for books.</p><p>And with dragon dictate, even the typing part is easy.</p><p>OTH, printing your own personal hardcopy on a personal printer is bloody expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There will never be true DRM for books.And with dragon dictate , even the typing part is easy.OTH , printing your own personal hardcopy on a personal printer is bloody expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There will never be true DRM for books.And with dragon dictate, even the typing part is easy.OTH, printing your own personal hardcopy on a personal printer is bloody expensive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608566</id>
	<title>My $0.02 worth</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1262290320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read fifty (50) plus books a year, and have since about 1987.</p><p>I keep some, re-read some of my faves three or four times.</p><p>When I am "done" with a book, it gets donated to a local library or given to a friend with an interest in such books.</p><p>IMHO, DRM in combination with the stupid copyright extension act passed some years ago, to me means that more and more books (whether they are entertainment only, or text books or whatever) that should make it into the public domain may never be seen again in any form, of then than already existing books, which will deteriorate over time.</p><p>There should be a law requiring that any book published (real book, publication, etc. whether "real" or electronic), non-DRM protected electronic copies should be forwarded for safeguarding by the Library of Congress and at least 8 (if not more) of the major libraries in the country. That way, once the stupid extended copyright expiration happens, these can then be released to the public domain properly. In other words, make it possible for the books to made public domain, as opposed to being obliterated entirely from human knowledge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read fifty ( 50 ) plus books a year , and have since about 1987.I keep some , re-read some of my faves three or four times.When I am " done " with a book , it gets donated to a local library or given to a friend with an interest in such books.IMHO , DRM in combination with the stupid copyright extension act passed some years ago , to me means that more and more books ( whether they are entertainment only , or text books or whatever ) that should make it into the public domain may never be seen again in any form , of then than already existing books , which will deteriorate over time.There should be a law requiring that any book published ( real book , publication , etc .
whether " real " or electronic ) , non-DRM protected electronic copies should be forwarded for safeguarding by the Library of Congress and at least 8 ( if not more ) of the major libraries in the country .
That way , once the stupid extended copyright expiration happens , these can then be released to the public domain properly .
In other words , make it possible for the books to made public domain , as opposed to being obliterated entirely from human knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read fifty (50) plus books a year, and have since about 1987.I keep some, re-read some of my faves three or four times.When I am "done" with a book, it gets donated to a local library or given to a friend with an interest in such books.IMHO, DRM in combination with the stupid copyright extension act passed some years ago, to me means that more and more books (whether they are entertainment only, or text books or whatever) that should make it into the public domain may never be seen again in any form, of then than already existing books, which will deteriorate over time.There should be a law requiring that any book published (real book, publication, etc.
whether "real" or electronic), non-DRM protected electronic copies should be forwarded for safeguarding by the Library of Congress and at least 8 (if not more) of the major libraries in the country.
That way, once the stupid extended copyright expiration happens, these can then be released to the public domain properly.
In other words, make it possible for the books to made public domain, as opposed to being obliterated entirely from human knowledge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there</title>
	<author>Savage-Rabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1262271000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way. and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmare</p><p>i don't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf's from mannning books. and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weight</p></div><p>That's true, PDF's and electronic books in general spare you the storage nightmare. On the other hand I <b>hate</b> reading PDFs off a computer screen and I have yet to find an electronic device that didn't suck as a ebook reader and that statement covers purpose designed ones like the Kindle as well. Perhaps if that rumored Apple tablet turns out to be more than just vaporware I'll have cause to reconsider... although... now that I think about it I rather doubt it simply because with these eBook readers they can apparently remotely delete and silently 'revise'  books in your electronic library after you bought them. Nobody can delete or 'revise' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.</p><p>I can well understand the why the move to electronic readers like the Kindle would worry authors and  book publishers. It has hitherto been considerably more work to pirate a book than to do so with movies, software and music and if that changes, all the 'goodwill' authors and publishers get from people downloading their stuff for free using BitTorrent &amp; co.  still won't pay their bills. Those bills have to be paid in real world money, not pirate consumer's goodwill. I buy lots of books on subjects such as the history of automotive, aviation and electronic technology. These books sometimes get printed in runs of no more than a few thousand copies by small time speciality publishers. The move to "full digital" inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy (YAY! we're getting even more stuff for free now)  but it's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I don't see as a good thing. It would mean the death of all but the biggest publishing houses, the ones that are rich enough to be able to survive the piracy. That in turn would mean a considerable reduction in the variety of what is being published.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with him some , but there is simply too much music , art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way .
and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmarei do n't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf 's from mannning books .
and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weightThat 's true , PDF 's and electronic books in general spare you the storage nightmare .
On the other hand I hate reading PDFs off a computer screen and I have yet to find an electronic device that did n't suck as a ebook reader and that statement covers purpose designed ones like the Kindle as well .
Perhaps if that rumored Apple tablet turns out to be more than just vaporware I 'll have cause to reconsider... although... now that I think about it I rather doubt it simply because with these eBook readers they can apparently remotely delete and silently 'revise ' books in your electronic library after you bought them .
Nobody can delete or 'revise ' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.I can well understand the why the move to electronic readers like the Kindle would worry authors and book publishers .
It has hitherto been considerably more work to pirate a book than to do so with movies , software and music and if that changes , all the 'goodwill ' authors and publishers get from people downloading their stuff for free using BitTorrent &amp; co. still wo n't pay their bills .
Those bills have to be paid in real world money , not pirate consumer 's goodwill .
I buy lots of books on subjects such as the history of automotive , aviation and electronic technology .
These books sometimes get printed in runs of no more than a few thousand copies by small time speciality publishers .
The move to " full digital " inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy ( YAY !
we 're getting even more stuff for free now ) but it 's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I do n't see as a good thing .
It would mean the death of all but the biggest publishing houses , the ones that are rich enough to be able to survive the piracy .
That in turn would mean a considerable reduction in the variety of what is being published .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way.
and if you do own the physical media it becomes a clutter and storage nightmarei don't buy too much ebooks but in the last few weeks i bought a MS SQL T-SQL ebook app on my iphone to read on the train to work and some pdf's from mannning books.
and the convenience factor is very nice in not carrying around the extra weightThat's true, PDF's and electronic books in general spare you the storage nightmare.
On the other hand I hate reading PDFs off a computer screen and I have yet to find an electronic device that didn't suck as a ebook reader and that statement covers purpose designed ones like the Kindle as well.
Perhaps if that rumored Apple tablet turns out to be more than just vaporware I'll have cause to reconsider... although... now that I think about it I rather doubt it simply because with these eBook readers they can apparently remotely delete and silently 'revise'  books in your electronic library after you bought them.
Nobody can delete or 'revise' a good old-fashioned hardcopy of some book I have bought and that is sitting in my good old-fashioned wooden bookshelf.I can well understand the why the move to electronic readers like the Kindle would worry authors and  book publishers.
It has hitherto been considerably more work to pirate a book than to do so with movies, software and music and if that changes, all the 'goodwill' authors and publishers get from people downloading their stuff for free using BitTorrent &amp; co.  still won't pay their bills.
Those bills have to be paid in real world money, not pirate consumer's goodwill.
I buy lots of books on subjects such as the history of automotive, aviation and electronic technology.
These books sometimes get printed in runs of no more than a few thousand copies by small time speciality publishers.
The move to "full digital" inevitably means an exponential increase in book piracy (YAY!
we're getting even more stuff for free now)  but it's also going to kill off that kind of small scale publishing which I don't see as a good thing.
It would mean the death of all but the biggest publishing houses, the ones that are rich enough to be able to survive the piracy.
That in turn would mean a considerable reduction in the variety of what is being published.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608838</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262291820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally agree with your comments, and was just thinking that the same argument could have been made of that heretic Guttenburg.<br>Can you imagine the outrage of the few elite book writers when they found out a machine could pump out almost limitless cheap (by their standards) books.</p><p>The only difference now is that the publishers own our representatives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree with your comments , and was just thinking that the same argument could have been made of that heretic Guttenburg.Can you imagine the outrage of the few elite book writers when they found out a machine could pump out almost limitless cheap ( by their standards ) books.The only difference now is that the publishers own our representatives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree with your comments, and was just thinking that the same argument could have been made of that heretic Guttenburg.Can you imagine the outrage of the few elite book writers when they found out a machine could pump out almost limitless cheap (by their standards) books.The only difference now is that the publishers own our representatives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605494</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262276700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM! If you give it away, you can't read it anymore. It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that). Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?</p><p>IMHO though, the world has changed, we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions. So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world, instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM. I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.</p></div><p>Sorry, no. A physical book as no build-in DRM. You can give a book away, but you can't give DRM content to anyone. You can't share it, and you don't own it. You can't sell it. In a world where information is truely free, culture flourishes. One of the books on the amazon kindle best seller lists right now is A Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes.</p><p>If it's up to publishers we're all reading Sarah Palin's shitty book and listening to Miley Cirus's second rate singing, because that's what is cheap, and that's what we're bombarded with. Publishing houses encourage pay-for play and permanent sales of IP as some kind of wall-street security. I mean, how messed up is it that a kid named Jackson from America could make billions on the work of a few kids from liverpool? How does that encourage art and culture?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM !
If you give it away , you ca n't read it anymore .
It ca n't easily be copied ( it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that ) .
Is n't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM ? IMHO though , the world has changed , we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions .
So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world , instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM .
I 'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely , there can also be culture , people who make money , artists , and so on.Sorry , no .
A physical book as no build-in DRM .
You can give a book away , but you ca n't give DRM content to anyone .
You ca n't share it , and you do n't own it .
You ca n't sell it .
In a world where information is truely free , culture flourishes .
One of the books on the amazon kindle best seller lists right now is A Conan Doyle 's Sherlock Holmes.If it 's up to publishers we 're all reading Sarah Palin 's shitty book and listening to Miley Cirus 's second rate singing , because that 's what is cheap , and that 's what we 're bombarded with .
Publishing houses encourage pay-for play and permanent sales of IP as some kind of wall-street security .
I mean , how messed up is it that a kid named Jackson from America could make billions on the work of a few kids from liverpool ?
How does that encourage art and culture ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!
If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.
It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that).
Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?IMHO though, the world has changed, we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions.
So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world, instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM.
I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.Sorry, no.
A physical book as no build-in DRM.
You can give a book away, but you can't give DRM content to anyone.
You can't share it, and you don't own it.
You can't sell it.
In a world where information is truely free, culture flourishes.
One of the books on the amazon kindle best seller lists right now is A Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes.If it's up to publishers we're all reading Sarah Palin's shitty book and listening to Miley Cirus's second rate singing, because that's what is cheap, and that's what we're bombarded with.
Publishing houses encourage pay-for play and permanent sales of IP as some kind of wall-street security.
I mean, how messed up is it that a kid named Jackson from America could make billions on the work of a few kids from liverpool?
How does that encourage art and culture?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605240</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>Mr. Slippery</author>
	<datestamp>1262275380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>DRM will destroy books.</p></div></blockquote><p>Until the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html" title="gnu.org" rel="nofollow">Tycho Uprising</a> [gnu.org], at least. (Can't believe no one has linked to "The Right to Read" yet. RMS, ahead of the curve as always.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DRM will destroy books.Until the Tycho Uprising [ gnu.org ] , at least .
( Ca n't believe no one has linked to " The Right to Read " yet .
RMS , ahead of the curve as always .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DRM will destroy books.Until the Tycho Uprising [gnu.org], at least.
(Can't believe no one has linked to "The Right to Read" yet.
RMS, ahead of the curve as always.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605830</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1262278560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man, rather than the message he is addressing? This topic is on Slashdot not just because it was Cory who made the speech, but because what he said is very relevant and well spoken. He isn't a legal expert, but he is a person with writing and publishing experience who is passionate about copyright issues, and willing to try a different approach with his own works.</p><p>I am strongly against the DRM craze and the idea of "licensing" content rather than selling copies. I am glad to see this topic being discussed, and I hope there are many others like Cory raising these questions and making people aware of what is at stake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man , rather than the message he is addressing ?
This topic is on Slashdot not just because it was Cory who made the speech , but because what he said is very relevant and well spoken .
He is n't a legal expert , but he is a person with writing and publishing experience who is passionate about copyright issues , and willing to try a different approach with his own works.I am strongly against the DRM craze and the idea of " licensing " content rather than selling copies .
I am glad to see this topic being discussed , and I hope there are many others like Cory raising these questions and making people aware of what is at stake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man, rather than the message he is addressing?
This topic is on Slashdot not just because it was Cory who made the speech, but because what he said is very relevant and well spoken.
He isn't a legal expert, but he is a person with writing and publishing experience who is passionate about copyright issues, and willing to try a different approach with his own works.I am strongly against the DRM craze and the idea of "licensing" content rather than selling copies.
I am glad to see this topic being discussed, and I hope there are many others like Cory raising these questions and making people aware of what is at stake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607774</id>
	<title>Re:The most important part of a digital book</title>
	<author>Aerows</author>
	<datestamp>1262286420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the same argument made against open source, yet it still survives.  Your main mistake is the idea that it is "working for free".  Some people have hobbies that extend beyond being a slave to money.  It isn't "work", it is a driving passion.
</p><p> If you don't ever produce anything in your life because it is your passion, and no other reason, I feel rather sorry for you.  One day, you will regret that perspective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the same argument made against open source , yet it still survives .
Your main mistake is the idea that it is " working for free " .
Some people have hobbies that extend beyond being a slave to money .
It is n't " work " , it is a driving passion .
If you do n't ever produce anything in your life because it is your passion , and no other reason , I feel rather sorry for you .
One day , you will regret that perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the same argument made against open source, yet it still survives.
Your main mistake is the idea that it is "working for free".
Some people have hobbies that extend beyond being a slave to money.
It isn't "work", it is a driving passion.
If you don't ever produce anything in your life because it is your passion, and no other reason, I feel rather sorry for you.
One day, you will regret that perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606800</id>
	<title>Ebook Readers</title>
	<author>InterStellaArtois</author>
	<datestamp>1262282760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I researched ebook readers recently - with a view to maybe buying one - then promptly struck them off my wishlist.  I wish all decisions could be as simple as this one.
<p>
I like the idea of having access to the titles I like wherever I am, without lugging around a veritable treasure chest, and I like the electronic ink concept.  But unless you're happy with smaller 'indy' publishing houses (and there's nothing wrong with those, but I'd like more choice), you're stuck with self-serving, vendor-bound, DRM-laced formats.  And I wouldn't purchase one of those at any price - it would be like buying trousers you can only wear on a Tuesday.
</p><p>
The DRM of the Sony Reader allows "any purchased e-book to be read on up to six devices, at least one of which must be a personal computer running Windows or Mac OS X" (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony\_Reader" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">citation</a> [wikipedia.org]).  6 devices sounds like a lot compared to what you usually get, but could easily be burned up in a few years.  I bought XP about 6 years ago and now it has a better life as a sparkly coaster - silly me, I shouldn't have upgraded or rebuilt my machines.  So then the average user would "upgrade", or buy a new copy in the "new format", because that's what all the magazines are saying is "hot".
</p><p>
And you can forget technical PDFs on e-readers, nice idea but think again.  You may be able to re-size and convert PDFs with pure prose to the reader format, but forget your fancy diagrams, equations and tables.
</p><p>
Seems to me the publishers are just pissed off that we can lend books to each other (thus breaking copyright, if you read the blurb in the front matter), and that they could never police that.  I'll stick to my library-in-a-suitcase thanks, now get your space-age sneakers off my lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I researched ebook readers recently - with a view to maybe buying one - then promptly struck them off my wishlist .
I wish all decisions could be as simple as this one .
I like the idea of having access to the titles I like wherever I am , without lugging around a veritable treasure chest , and I like the electronic ink concept .
But unless you 're happy with smaller 'indy ' publishing houses ( and there 's nothing wrong with those , but I 'd like more choice ) , you 're stuck with self-serving , vendor-bound , DRM-laced formats .
And I would n't purchase one of those at any price - it would be like buying trousers you can only wear on a Tuesday .
The DRM of the Sony Reader allows " any purchased e-book to be read on up to six devices , at least one of which must be a personal computer running Windows or Mac OS X " ( citation [ wikipedia.org ] ) .
6 devices sounds like a lot compared to what you usually get , but could easily be burned up in a few years .
I bought XP about 6 years ago and now it has a better life as a sparkly coaster - silly me , I should n't have upgraded or rebuilt my machines .
So then the average user would " upgrade " , or buy a new copy in the " new format " , because that 's what all the magazines are saying is " hot " .
And you can forget technical PDFs on e-readers , nice idea but think again .
You may be able to re-size and convert PDFs with pure prose to the reader format , but forget your fancy diagrams , equations and tables .
Seems to me the publishers are just pissed off that we can lend books to each other ( thus breaking copyright , if you read the blurb in the front matter ) , and that they could never police that .
I 'll stick to my library-in-a-suitcase thanks , now get your space-age sneakers off my lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I researched ebook readers recently - with a view to maybe buying one - then promptly struck them off my wishlist.
I wish all decisions could be as simple as this one.
I like the idea of having access to the titles I like wherever I am, without lugging around a veritable treasure chest, and I like the electronic ink concept.
But unless you're happy with smaller 'indy' publishing houses (and there's nothing wrong with those, but I'd like more choice), you're stuck with self-serving, vendor-bound, DRM-laced formats.
And I wouldn't purchase one of those at any price - it would be like buying trousers you can only wear on a Tuesday.
The DRM of the Sony Reader allows "any purchased e-book to be read on up to six devices, at least one of which must be a personal computer running Windows or Mac OS X" (citation [wikipedia.org]).
6 devices sounds like a lot compared to what you usually get, but could easily be burned up in a few years.
I bought XP about 6 years ago and now it has a better life as a sparkly coaster - silly me, I shouldn't have upgraded or rebuilt my machines.
So then the average user would "upgrade", or buy a new copy in the "new format", because that's what all the magazines are saying is "hot".
And you can forget technical PDFs on e-readers, nice idea but think again.
You may be able to re-size and convert PDFs with pure prose to the reader format, but forget your fancy diagrams, equations and tables.
Seems to me the publishers are just pissed off that we can lend books to each other (thus breaking copyright, if you read the blurb in the front matter), and that they could never police that.
I'll stick to my library-in-a-suitcase thanks, now get your space-age sneakers off my lawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606206</id>
	<title>Quirks and eBooks</title>
	<author>kagaku</author>
	<datestamp>1262280180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>My first run in with eBook "quirks" didn't take long to happen. I received a Kindle for Christmas, and having already scouted out some prospective books to purchase I had some novels in mind. The first book I read was Flood by Stephen Baxter - I just finished that last night. Flood is followed by its sequel - Ark (by the same author). However, upon trying to buy Ark I couldn't find it anywhere on the Amazon kindle store. I recalled seeing it when browsing before (that's why I bought this series first, because I noticed both books were available in kindle editions) - however now it was missing. Trying a few different things, I logged out of my Amazon account. Low and behold, the ebook appears for sale! Kindle edition and all - however I noticed a very small notice (almost fine print) below the "Buy with 1-Click" button that read: "Due to copyright restrictions, this title not available in the United States". WTF! It took changing my address to that of a Canadian friend of mine in order to be allowed to purchase this book - thankfully they still accepted by US-addressed credit card. <br> <br>

Copyright restrictions and such on sale of books/music/movies is extremely stupid in my opinion. In the end all it took was changing my address twice - once to Canada and then back - but it's the principle of it all. I'm happily reading my book now; a book that just to purchase I had to be dishonest about where I lived simply so I'd be <b>allowed</b> to purchase it. <br> <br>

DRM is another issue I'm worried about, however with the advent of tools to strip the Kindle <b>and</b> nook DRM, I'm not to worried about moving my books to a new platform once a better read becomes available.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My first run in with eBook " quirks " did n't take long to happen .
I received a Kindle for Christmas , and having already scouted out some prospective books to purchase I had some novels in mind .
The first book I read was Flood by Stephen Baxter - I just finished that last night .
Flood is followed by its sequel - Ark ( by the same author ) .
However , upon trying to buy Ark I could n't find it anywhere on the Amazon kindle store .
I recalled seeing it when browsing before ( that 's why I bought this series first , because I noticed both books were available in kindle editions ) - however now it was missing .
Trying a few different things , I logged out of my Amazon account .
Low and behold , the ebook appears for sale !
Kindle edition and all - however I noticed a very small notice ( almost fine print ) below the " Buy with 1-Click " button that read : " Due to copyright restrictions , this title not available in the United States " .
WTF ! It took changing my address to that of a Canadian friend of mine in order to be allowed to purchase this book - thankfully they still accepted by US-addressed credit card .
Copyright restrictions and such on sale of books/music/movies is extremely stupid in my opinion .
In the end all it took was changing my address twice - once to Canada and then back - but it 's the principle of it all .
I 'm happily reading my book now ; a book that just to purchase I had to be dishonest about where I lived simply so I 'd be allowed to purchase it .
DRM is another issue I 'm worried about , however with the advent of tools to strip the Kindle and nook DRM , I 'm not to worried about moving my books to a new platform once a better read becomes available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first run in with eBook "quirks" didn't take long to happen.
I received a Kindle for Christmas, and having already scouted out some prospective books to purchase I had some novels in mind.
The first book I read was Flood by Stephen Baxter - I just finished that last night.
Flood is followed by its sequel - Ark (by the same author).
However, upon trying to buy Ark I couldn't find it anywhere on the Amazon kindle store.
I recalled seeing it when browsing before (that's why I bought this series first, because I noticed both books were available in kindle editions) - however now it was missing.
Trying a few different things, I logged out of my Amazon account.
Low and behold, the ebook appears for sale!
Kindle edition and all - however I noticed a very small notice (almost fine print) below the "Buy with 1-Click" button that read: "Due to copyright restrictions, this title not available in the United States".
WTF! It took changing my address to that of a Canadian friend of mine in order to be allowed to purchase this book - thankfully they still accepted by US-addressed credit card.
Copyright restrictions and such on sale of books/music/movies is extremely stupid in my opinion.
In the end all it took was changing my address twice - once to Canada and then back - but it's the principle of it all.
I'm happily reading my book now; a book that just to purchase I had to be dishonest about where I lived simply so I'd be allowed to purchase it.
DRM is another issue I'm worried about, however with the advent of tools to strip the Kindle and nook DRM, I'm not to worried about moving my books to a new platform once a better read becomes available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607192</id>
	<title>unbroken DRM at expiration is copyfraud</title>
	<author>harvey the nerd</author>
	<datestamp>1262284260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>An unbroken DRM at copyright expiration is a form of "copyfraud", an illegal distraint of the copy's owner (purchaser).</htmltext>
<tokenext>An unbroken DRM at copyright expiration is a form of " copyfraud " , an illegal distraint of the copy 's owner ( purchaser ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An unbroken DRM at copyright expiration is a form of "copyfraud", an illegal distraint of the copy's owner (purchaser).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605610</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>c</author>
	<datestamp>1262277300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing)</p><p>&gt; He was referencing the founders of the United States who<br>&gt; write its constitution.</p><p>A Canadian speaking at a Canadian conference referencing the founders of the United States as "Sacred Ancestors"?</p><p>c.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) &gt; He was referencing the founders of the United States who &gt; write its constitution.A Canadian speaking at a Canadian conference referencing the founders of the United States as " Sacred Ancestors " ? c .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing)&gt; He was referencing the founders of the United States who&gt; write its constitution.A Canadian speaking at a Canadian conference referencing the founders of the United States as "Sacred Ancestors"?c.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606274</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262280600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many, many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity.</p></div><p>Best single line summary ever.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody ever went broke from piracy , but many , many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity.Best single line summary ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many, many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity.Best single line summary ever.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604402</id>
	<title>Prior Art</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262268180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>God spoke. He wants His commandments back. It might get very wet for a long time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>God spoke .
He wants His commandments back .
It might get very wet for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God spoke.
He wants His commandments back.
It might get very wet for a long time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30619994</id>
	<title>Own it today!</title>
	<author>DeVilla</author>
	<datestamp>1230837480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been wondering for a while when the first set of law suits will begin for false advertising.  So often I've heard the phrase "Own it today..." for all sorts of things that various content publishers are suing people over because those people do not 'own' the work they have.  I just saw that phrase on the Harry Potter movie web site.  Supposedly, you can "Own it" on blu-ray if the ad on the web site is to be believed.  Odd how something as simple as the idea of 'ownership' can get this screwed up.  I imagine The Cloud will screw up the idea of 'possession' in the same way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been wondering for a while when the first set of law suits will begin for false advertising .
So often I 've heard the phrase " Own it today... " for all sorts of things that various content publishers are suing people over because those people do not 'own ' the work they have .
I just saw that phrase on the Harry Potter movie web site .
Supposedly , you can " Own it " on blu-ray if the ad on the web site is to be believed .
Odd how something as simple as the idea of 'ownership ' can get this screwed up .
I imagine The Cloud will screw up the idea of 'possession ' in the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been wondering for a while when the first set of law suits will begin for false advertising.
So often I've heard the phrase "Own it today..." for all sorts of things that various content publishers are suing people over because those people do not 'own' the work they have.
I just saw that phrase on the Harry Potter movie web site.
Supposedly, you can "Own it" on blu-ray if the ad on the web site is to be believed.
Odd how something as simple as the idea of 'ownership' can get this screwed up.
I imagine The Cloud will screw up the idea of 'possession' in the same way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608426</id>
	<title>Removing DRM</title>
	<author>moggie\_xev</author>
	<datestamp>1262289540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have bought over 1200 ebook/stories. I do buy stories with DRM attached but only if I know I can remove it. Here are some links:<br> <br>

mobidedrm <a href="http://darkreverser.wordpress.com/" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://darkreverser.wordpress.com/</a> [wordpress.com] This removes the DRM from mobi books<br> <br>

ineptkey <a href="http://i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-epub.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-epub.html</a> [blogspot.com] This removes the DRM from epub.<br> <br>

calibre <a href="http://calibre-ebook.com/" title="calibre-ebook.com" rel="nofollow">http://calibre-ebook.com/</a> [calibre-ebook.com] An open source book management system that also does format conversion.<br> <br>

I have never shared any of the books I have bought although I suppose I would in theory be willing to lend one to someone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have bought over 1200 ebook/stories .
I do buy stories with DRM attached but only if I know I can remove it .
Here are some links : mobidedrm http : //darkreverser.wordpress.com/ [ wordpress.com ] This removes the DRM from mobi books ineptkey http : //i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-epub.html [ blogspot.com ] This removes the DRM from epub .
calibre http : //calibre-ebook.com/ [ calibre-ebook.com ] An open source book management system that also does format conversion .
I have never shared any of the books I have bought although I suppose I would in theory be willing to lend one to someone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have bought over 1200 ebook/stories.
I do buy stories with DRM attached but only if I know I can remove it.
Here are some links: 

mobidedrm http://darkreverser.wordpress.com/ [wordpress.com] This removes the DRM from mobi books 

ineptkey http://i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-epub.html [blogspot.com] This removes the DRM from epub.
calibre http://calibre-ebook.com/ [calibre-ebook.com] An open source book management system that also does format conversion.
I have never shared any of the books I have bought although I suppose I would in theory be willing to lend one to someone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604538</id>
	<title>what did they say?</title>
	<author>phrostie</author>
	<datestamp>1262269920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for the most part i agree with him, but what did they say?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for the most part i agree with him , but what did they say ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for the most part i agree with him, but what did they say?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</id>
	<title>Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262268420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) did n't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607858</id>
	<title>Paperbooks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262286720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Digital information is just so fragile. A book will far outlive any hard drive or newer storage medium. Unless the language dies out, the book will be readable for a couple hundred years at least (if the paper is good), while the digital book will have sucumbed to the introduction of newer formats, or the death of its publisher (while still being under protection).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Digital information is just so fragile .
A book will far outlive any hard drive or newer storage medium .
Unless the language dies out , the book will be readable for a couple hundred years at least ( if the paper is good ) , while the digital book will have sucumbed to the introduction of newer formats , or the death of its publisher ( while still being under protection ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Digital information is just so fragile.
A book will far outlive any hard drive or newer storage medium.
Unless the language dies out, the book will be readable for a couple hundred years at least (if the paper is good), while the digital book will have sucumbed to the introduction of newer formats, or the death of its publisher (while still being under protection).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528</id>
	<title>Re:hyperbolic nonsense</title>
	<author>burne</author>
	<datestamp>1262269740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I checked the message was firmly attached to the medium. I have 250 year old books who still confirm to that basic principle.</p><p>In your eagerness to outsmugg Doctorow you missed his message completely, focussing on the medium itself. I 'own' a couple of e-books from the palmpilot-era which, thanks to DRM, are unreadable now. I can remedy that with an emulator, but the current generation of DRM 'promises' online checks which will fail when technologies change or companies fail.</p><p>I get to keep the medium, a bunch of scrambled bits, but somebody will steal the content of DRM-ed books, one day.</p><p>DRM will destroy books. Individual ones, and 'book' as generic term. Knowledge will no longer be transfered, it will be rented out for a limited time only.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I checked the message was firmly attached to the medium .
I have 250 year old books who still confirm to that basic principle.In your eagerness to outsmugg Doctorow you missed his message completely , focussing on the medium itself .
I 'own ' a couple of e-books from the palmpilot-era which , thanks to DRM , are unreadable now .
I can remedy that with an emulator , but the current generation of DRM 'promises ' online checks which will fail when technologies change or companies fail.I get to keep the medium , a bunch of scrambled bits , but somebody will steal the content of DRM-ed books , one day.DRM will destroy books .
Individual ones , and 'book ' as generic term .
Knowledge will no longer be transfered , it will be rented out for a limited time only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I checked the message was firmly attached to the medium.
I have 250 year old books who still confirm to that basic principle.In your eagerness to outsmugg Doctorow you missed his message completely, focussing on the medium itself.
I 'own' a couple of e-books from the palmpilot-era which, thanks to DRM, are unreadable now.
I can remedy that with an emulator, but the current generation of DRM 'promises' online checks which will fail when technologies change or companies fail.I get to keep the medium, a bunch of scrambled bits, but somebody will steal the content of DRM-ed books, one day.DRM will destroy books.
Individual ones, and 'book' as generic term.
Knowledge will no longer be transfered, it will be rented out for a limited time only.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608900</id>
	<title>If I pay for it....</title>
	<author>DeltaQH</author>
	<datestamp>1262292060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I have pay for it I own it.<br> <br>

If I dont own it, I wont pay for it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have pay for it I own it .
If I dont own it , I wont pay for it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have pay for it I own it.
If I dont own it, I wont pay for it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605376</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1262276100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're buying any sort of digital *anything* and expecting it to last through the ages you are being rather silly.</p><p>If you want something to last through the ages it has to be directly human interpretable and in a language/format that will persist.</p><p>Archeologists are going to hate this era. Most of our culture will not be available to them. Gone. Poof. Unreadable. Records and film and paper (ie very analog) will be the media that will still be viewable. Digital? Gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're buying any sort of digital * anything * and expecting it to last through the ages you are being rather silly.If you want something to last through the ages it has to be directly human interpretable and in a language/format that will persist.Archeologists are going to hate this era .
Most of our culture will not be available to them .
Gone. Poof .
Unreadable. Records and film and paper ( ie very analog ) will be the media that will still be viewable .
Digital ? Gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're buying any sort of digital *anything* and expecting it to last through the ages you are being rather silly.If you want something to last through the ages it has to be directly human interpretable and in a language/format that will persist.Archeologists are going to hate this era.
Most of our culture will not be available to them.
Gone. Poof.
Unreadable. Records and film and paper (ie very analog) will be the media that will still be viewable.
Digital? Gone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604504</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government is for the people not the publishers.</p><p>IP law is [was] for the people not the publishers.</p><p>They are given temporary rights to publish a given work.  Since they are abusing that right, it is proper that the right be taken away.  Since the courts won't do it, the people have to.</p><p>Laws only exist as long as the governed consent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government is for the people not the publishers.IP law is [ was ] for the people not the publishers.They are given temporary rights to publish a given work .
Since they are abusing that right , it is proper that the right be taken away .
Since the courts wo n't do it , the people have to.Laws only exist as long as the governed consent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government is for the people not the publishers.IP law is [was] for the people not the publishers.They are given temporary rights to publish a given work.
Since they are abusing that right, it is proper that the right be taken away.
Since the courts won't do it, the people have to.Laws only exist as long as the governed consent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604540</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And of those 100,000 strangers, how many are legitimate lost sales, how many just fill up their local storage with anything like kids with mp3s and videos? How many even read the book? How many read the book and then go on to buy titles from the same author because they loved it?</p><p>Whether you like it or not, digital distribution is here to stay. The scarcity of product is no longer relevant. Digital books should be 10 cents, not DRM crippled and costing more than physical paperback in a brick store. Once something is cheap, people will simply purchase it because it is more convenient. Keep the prices artificially higher comparable to something that has to be made, shipped, stored, collected, and you'll find people work around the system regardless of what the law says.</p><p>Stock images have been through this change, they did it very quickly too. Compare what an image would have cost for your brochure, or whatever, 10 years ago to what and how you get them now. Try $1000 down to a buck. Guess which is making the most money? Clue: not the old model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And of those 100,000 strangers , how many are legitimate lost sales , how many just fill up their local storage with anything like kids with mp3s and videos ?
How many even read the book ?
How many read the book and then go on to buy titles from the same author because they loved it ? Whether you like it or not , digital distribution is here to stay .
The scarcity of product is no longer relevant .
Digital books should be 10 cents , not DRM crippled and costing more than physical paperback in a brick store .
Once something is cheap , people will simply purchase it because it is more convenient .
Keep the prices artificially higher comparable to something that has to be made , shipped , stored , collected , and you 'll find people work around the system regardless of what the law says.Stock images have been through this change , they did it very quickly too .
Compare what an image would have cost for your brochure , or whatever , 10 years ago to what and how you get them now .
Try $ 1000 down to a buck .
Guess which is making the most money ?
Clue : not the old model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And of those 100,000 strangers, how many are legitimate lost sales, how many just fill up their local storage with anything like kids with mp3s and videos?
How many even read the book?
How many read the book and then go on to buy titles from the same author because they loved it?Whether you like it or not, digital distribution is here to stay.
The scarcity of product is no longer relevant.
Digital books should be 10 cents, not DRM crippled and costing more than physical paperback in a brick store.
Once something is cheap, people will simply purchase it because it is more convenient.
Keep the prices artificially higher comparable to something that has to be made, shipped, stored, collected, and you'll find people work around the system regardless of what the law says.Stock images have been through this change, they did it very quickly too.
Compare what an image would have cost for your brochure, or whatever, 10 years ago to what and how you get them now.
Try $1000 down to a buck.
Guess which is making the most money?
Clue: not the old model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609740</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe if enough people are bitten...?</title>
	<author>chammy</author>
	<datestamp>1262253660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products, how PS3s are flying off the shelves, it makes it really hard to care.</p> </div><p>Not that the ps3 isn't a huge DRM platform (it's still uncracked while the 360 and Wii have been for years) but Sony is a large company. Just because the division that does music (SME) screwed people over doesn't mean that the one doing the PS3 (SCE) will.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products , how PS3s are flying off the shelves , it makes it really hard to care .
Not that the ps3 is n't a huge DRM platform ( it 's still uncracked while the 360 and Wii have been for years ) but Sony is a large company .
Just because the division that does music ( SME ) screwed people over does n't mean that the one doing the PS3 ( SCE ) will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products, how PS3s are flying off the shelves, it makes it really hard to care.
Not that the ps3 isn't a huge DRM platform (it's still uncracked while the 360 and Wii have been for years) but Sony is a large company.
Just because the division that does music (SME) screwed people over doesn't mean that the one doing the PS3 (SCE) will.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609932</id>
	<title>Re:The most important part of a digital book</title>
	<author>NeutronCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1262254860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them, good luck. Freedom is nice, but eating is nicer. Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.</p></div><p>His books are freely available for download. To get a direct example link: <a href="http://craphound.com/littlebrother/Cory\_Doctorow\_-\_Little\_Brother\_Dutch.epub" title="craphound.com">http://craphound.com/littlebrother/Cory\_Doctorow\_-\_Little\_Brother\_Dutch.epub</a> [craphound.com]. Go have fun.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them , good luck .
Freedom is nice , but eating is nicer .
Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.His books are freely available for download .
To get a direct example link : http : //craphound.com/littlebrother/Cory \ _Doctorow \ _- \ _Little \ _Brother \ _Dutch.epub [ craphound.com ] .
Go have fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Cory sees his financial future in people having his written works without paying for them, good luck.
Freedom is nice, but eating is nicer.
Freedom can be enjoyed a lot better with a full belly.His books are freely available for download.
To get a direct example link: http://craphound.com/littlebrother/Cory\_Doctorow\_-\_Little\_Brother\_Dutch.epub [craphound.com].
Go have fun.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604992</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262273640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously?  He's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog. He's an expert on nothing. He has not formally studied anything. He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable. Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.</p></div><p> <i>Ad hominem</i> arguments can also be used against any other activist or public speaker out there, and are equally worthless. If you disagree with the message, attacking the messenger will do nothing to prove you right.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously ?
He 's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog .
He 's an expert on nothing .
He has not formally studied anything .
He mouths off about copyright all the time , but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable .
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise .
Ad hominem arguments can also be used against any other activist or public speaker out there , and are equally worthless .
If you disagree with the message , attacking the messenger will do nothing to prove you right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...why anyone takes Cory Doctorow seriously?
He's a political activist and passable young-adult sci-fi author who contributes to a geek blog.
He's an expert on nothing.
He has not formally studied anything.
He mouths off about copyright all the time, but his grasp of law and legal history is laughable.
Yet he consistently makes headlines for saying asinine things about subjects about which he has no expertise.
Ad hominem arguments can also be used against any other activist or public speaker out there, and are equally worthless.
If you disagree with the message, attacking the messenger will do nothing to prove you right.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604658</id>
	<title>DRM itself isn't the problem.</title>
	<author>Michael\_gr</author>
	<datestamp>1262271060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>DRM is a copy-protection scheme, which is only natural when you are attempting to sell anything that can be easily duplicated. But DRM is a technology designed to enforce a legal concept. Currently, it is used to enforce the idea of "license to read". But it doesn't have to! DRM can be used even when the rights state that the digital copy is owned by the reader. If there is some legal problem with this, the law can be changed. But it has nothing to do with DRM itself.

I believe DRM should allow one to transfer their digital copy (of anything), free of charge, to other people, for a limited period of time (loaning) or indefinitely (selling or giving away). DRM should also be compatible across all vendors and the DRM scheme should be taken out of vendors and into the hands of an independent body of some sort. Once such a scheme is in place, I will happily buy DRM'd books.</htmltext>
<tokenext>DRM is a copy-protection scheme , which is only natural when you are attempting to sell anything that can be easily duplicated .
But DRM is a technology designed to enforce a legal concept .
Currently , it is used to enforce the idea of " license to read " .
But it does n't have to !
DRM can be used even when the rights state that the digital copy is owned by the reader .
If there is some legal problem with this , the law can be changed .
But it has nothing to do with DRM itself .
I believe DRM should allow one to transfer their digital copy ( of anything ) , free of charge , to other people , for a limited period of time ( loaning ) or indefinitely ( selling or giving away ) .
DRM should also be compatible across all vendors and the DRM scheme should be taken out of vendors and into the hands of an independent body of some sort .
Once such a scheme is in place , I will happily buy DRM 'd books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DRM is a copy-protection scheme, which is only natural when you are attempting to sell anything that can be easily duplicated.
But DRM is a technology designed to enforce a legal concept.
Currently, it is used to enforce the idea of "license to read".
But it doesn't have to!
DRM can be used even when the rights state that the digital copy is owned by the reader.
If there is some legal problem with this, the law can be changed.
But it has nothing to do with DRM itself.
I believe DRM should allow one to transfer their digital copy (of anything), free of charge, to other people, for a limited period of time (loaning) or indefinitely (selling or giving away).
DRM should also be compatible across all vendors and the DRM scheme should be taken out of vendors and into the hands of an independent body of some sort.
Once such a scheme is in place, I will happily buy DRM'd books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604932</id>
	<title>New tag</title>
	<author>snspdaarf</author>
	<datestamp>1262273220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't it about time for a "Oh-no-it's-Cory" tag?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it about time for a " Oh-no-it 's-Cory " tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it about time for a "Oh-no-it's-Cory" tag?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605284</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262275620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cory Doctorow's talents are self-promotion and demagogy. With them he has amassed enough influence and a big enough following that when he has something to say there is always someone to give him a podium and a crowd to listen.  In another universe he is probably a politician.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cory Doctorow 's talents are self-promotion and demagogy .
With them he has amassed enough influence and a big enough following that when he has something to say there is always someone to give him a podium and a crowd to listen .
In another universe he is probably a politician .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cory Doctorow's talents are self-promotion and demagogy.
With them he has amassed enough influence and a big enough following that when he has something to say there is always someone to give him a podium and a crowd to listen.
In another universe he is probably a politician.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605074</id>
	<title>The sad thing is</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1262274120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sad thing is that many Americans don't care about these rights.  They are aliterate ( choosing not to read ) so they don't regularly enjoy and value these rights =&gt; they will not fight for them.</p><p>Ironically, the ebook readers with gadget appeal will get some people reading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sad thing is that many Americans do n't care about these rights .
They are aliterate ( choosing not to read ) so they do n't regularly enjoy and value these rights = &gt; they will not fight for them.Ironically , the ebook readers with gadget appeal will get some people reading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sad thing is that many Americans don't care about these rights.
They are aliterate ( choosing not to read ) so they don't regularly enjoy and value these rights =&gt; they will not fight for them.Ironically, the ebook readers with gadget appeal will get some people reading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604900</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>TrekkieGod</author>
	<datestamp>1262273100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.</p></div><p>Scribes didn't have a clue about the effect the printing press would have on their profession.</p><p>Even if you're right, and the publishing industry as it stands today dies, so what?  Or do you long for the days when books were wildly expensive and very few had access to them because they had to be copied by hand?  New technology kills industries, new ones take their place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) did n't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.Scribes did n't have a clue about the effect the printing press would have on their profession.Even if you 're right , and the publishing industry as it stands today dies , so what ?
Or do you long for the days when books were wildly expensive and very few had access to them because they had to be copied by hand ?
New technology kills industries , new ones take their place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) didn't have a clue about what effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry.Scribes didn't have a clue about the effect the printing press would have on their profession.Even if you're right, and the publishing industry as it stands today dies, so what?
Or do you long for the days when books were wildly expensive and very few had access to them because they had to be copied by hand?
New technology kills industries, new ones take their place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605006</id>
	<title>DRM + e-books = 1984 &amp; Fahrenheit 451</title>
	<author>KwKSilver</author>
	<datestamp>1262273700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This kind of stuff would have made Winston Smith's day job so much easier.  Rewrite history then push it out so as to override previous copies.  And the rulers of the Fahrenheit 451 world could simply revoke the digital certificate of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... every book or every book with ideas they want suppressed.  Sound like the media cartels' wet dream?  <b> <i>It is, it is.</i> </b>  And that of would-be tyrants?  <b> <i>Even more so.</i> </b> <br> <br>

I was getting halfway interested in the Kindle until the 1984 debacle.  That shows that DRM has a much darker potential than its proponents will ever acknowledge.  Fuck all that shit.  (Not picking on Amazon; I like it and have had an account there for years.)  Corporations cannot be trusted to have any interest in freedom of any kind for the public.  No doubt their accountants would show it as a negative (if intangible) item on their balance sheets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This kind of stuff would have made Winston Smith 's day job so much easier .
Rewrite history then push it out so as to override previous copies .
And the rulers of the Fahrenheit 451 world could simply revoke the digital certificate of ... every book or every book with ideas they want suppressed .
Sound like the media cartels ' wet dream ?
It is , it is .
And that of would-be tyrants ?
Even more so .
I was getting halfway interested in the Kindle until the 1984 debacle .
That shows that DRM has a much darker potential than its proponents will ever acknowledge .
Fuck all that shit .
( Not picking on Amazon ; I like it and have had an account there for years .
) Corporations can not be trusted to have any interest in freedom of any kind for the public .
No doubt their accountants would show it as a negative ( if intangible ) item on their balance sheets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This kind of stuff would have made Winston Smith's day job so much easier.
Rewrite history then push it out so as to override previous copies.
And the rulers of the Fahrenheit 451 world could simply revoke the digital certificate of ... every book or every book with ideas they want suppressed.
Sound like the media cartels' wet dream?
It is, it is.
And that of would-be tyrants?
Even more so.
I was getting halfway interested in the Kindle until the 1984 debacle.
That shows that DRM has a much darker potential than its proponents will ever acknowledge.
Fuck all that shit.
(Not picking on Amazon; I like it and have had an account there for years.
)  Corporations cannot be trusted to have any interest in freedom of any kind for the public.
No doubt their accountants would show it as a negative (if intangible) item on their balance sheets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607656</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1262285940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hell, i was trying to locate a book a while back, and found it was out of print.</p><p>my only option then? local library, and they happended to have not one, but two copies.</p><p>funny enough, rather then loan it and read it in one go, i have found myself going to the library and sit down to read about a chapter at a time, when i have the time to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hell , i was trying to locate a book a while back , and found it was out of print.my only option then ?
local library , and they happended to have not one , but two copies.funny enough , rather then loan it and read it in one go , i have found myself going to the library and sit down to read about a chapter at a time , when i have the time to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hell, i was trying to locate a book a while back, and found it was out of print.my only option then?
local library, and they happended to have not one, but two copies.funny enough, rather then loan it and read it in one go, i have found myself going to the library and sit down to read about a chapter at a time, when i have the time to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606414</id>
	<title>Re:E-Books: we have to deal with them</title>
	<author>Big Boss</author>
	<datestamp>1262281440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So use the hardware, but disable the cellular connection so they can't mess with your stuff. Or modify the OS like the Nook hackers have been doing I suppose. Then just don't buy the DRMed stuff, or buy it for the "license" and download a clean copy. While probably not legal, it's at least ethical as you are paying for the content. For real protection, keep your original, non DRM copies on an offline media with MD5 or better checksums so you can tell if something has been tampered with. Or sign them with your own certificate.</p><p>IMO, this "license" crap needs to be sorted out. Either I own the physical copy, which doesn't really make sense with digital copies, or I own a license to use the content and which particular file I use doesn't really matter. Of course, I'm also one of the "extremists" that think that Copyright is a trade and must be ABLE to expire, so DRM should be mutually exclusive with legal Copyright protection. You can have technology protect your stuff, or you can have legal protection for your stuff, not both.</p><p>Of course, I also think that Copyright for something created in my lifetime should expire in my lifetime, the horror.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So use the hardware , but disable the cellular connection so they ca n't mess with your stuff .
Or modify the OS like the Nook hackers have been doing I suppose .
Then just do n't buy the DRMed stuff , or buy it for the " license " and download a clean copy .
While probably not legal , it 's at least ethical as you are paying for the content .
For real protection , keep your original , non DRM copies on an offline media with MD5 or better checksums so you can tell if something has been tampered with .
Or sign them with your own certificate.IMO , this " license " crap needs to be sorted out .
Either I own the physical copy , which does n't really make sense with digital copies , or I own a license to use the content and which particular file I use does n't really matter .
Of course , I 'm also one of the " extremists " that think that Copyright is a trade and must be ABLE to expire , so DRM should be mutually exclusive with legal Copyright protection .
You can have technology protect your stuff , or you can have legal protection for your stuff , not both.Of course , I also think that Copyright for something created in my lifetime should expire in my lifetime , the horror .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So use the hardware, but disable the cellular connection so they can't mess with your stuff.
Or modify the OS like the Nook hackers have been doing I suppose.
Then just don't buy the DRMed stuff, or buy it for the "license" and download a clean copy.
While probably not legal, it's at least ethical as you are paying for the content.
For real protection, keep your original, non DRM copies on an offline media with MD5 or better checksums so you can tell if something has been tampered with.
Or sign them with your own certificate.IMO, this "license" crap needs to be sorted out.
Either I own the physical copy, which doesn't really make sense with digital copies, or I own a license to use the content and which particular file I use doesn't really matter.
Of course, I'm also one of the "extremists" that think that Copyright is a trade and must be ABLE to expire, so DRM should be mutually exclusive with legal Copyright protection.
You can have technology protect your stuff, or you can have legal protection for your stuff, not both.Of course, I also think that Copyright for something created in my lifetime should expire in my lifetime, the horror.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609414</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262251800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This whole situation was foretold by Richard Stallman in an essay called The Right to Read from 1997: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html" title="gnu.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html</a> [gnu.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole situation was foretold by Richard Stallman in an essay called The Right to Read from 1997 : http : //www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html [ gnu.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole situation was foretold by Richard Stallman in an essay called The Right to Read from 1997: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html [gnu.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605954</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>webdog314</author>
	<datestamp>1262279100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hear what you're saying, but unfortunately, the world you dream of is composed of people who value their convenience more than they do your profits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear what you 're saying , but unfortunately , the world you dream of is composed of people who value their convenience more than they do your profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear what you're saying, but unfortunately, the world you dream of is composed of people who value their convenience more than they do your profits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604536</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there v2</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sheesh.  Epic comprehension of nature and scale of problem fail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sheesh .
Epic comprehension of nature and scale of problem fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sheesh.
Epic comprehension of nature and scale of problem fail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609684</id>
	<title>1984</title>
	<author>Ozlanthos</author>
	<datestamp>1262253420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As much as I hate that book, it clearly demonstrated what these modern-day book burners really want. They want to be able to change the content of books and news stories without your knowledge or approval. I know that sounds "conspiratorial", and "paranoid", but keep in mind the recent debacle where Kindles were remotely wiped of their "purchased" copies of 1984 without the knowledge or consent of their respective owners. I considered that event to be a preview of what these assholes have in mind for the future of the written word.
<br>
<br>
-Oz</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I hate that book , it clearly demonstrated what these modern-day book burners really want .
They want to be able to change the content of books and news stories without your knowledge or approval .
I know that sounds " conspiratorial " , and " paranoid " , but keep in mind the recent debacle where Kindles were remotely wiped of their " purchased " copies of 1984 without the knowledge or consent of their respective owners .
I considered that event to be a preview of what these assholes have in mind for the future of the written word .
-Oz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I hate that book, it clearly demonstrated what these modern-day book burners really want.
They want to be able to change the content of books and news stories without your knowledge or approval.
I know that sounds "conspiratorial", and "paranoid", but keep in mind the recent debacle where Kindles were remotely wiped of their "purchased" copies of 1984 without the knowledge or consent of their respective owners.
I considered that event to be a preview of what these assholes have in mind for the future of the written word.
-Oz</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262271660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing)</i></p><p>He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution. And your "effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry" is entirely bogus. It is a positive effect, not a negative one. Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list. Care to explain that one, Einstein?</p><p>He explains why in the forward to his book <i>Little Brother</i>. There's no way you're going to buy a book by an author you've never heard of, but there's no risk in checking one out from the library (there are way more than 100K libraries, each with a copy for everyone to check out and read), and if you like the author's work, THEN you're likely to buy.</p><p>Nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many, many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity. Your argument is as bogus as Jack Valenti's "the VCR tape is to the movie industry what Jack the Ripper is to women". You see how that one worked out.</p><p>Valenti's and your statements are entirely false, have been proven false, and there is not one shred of evidence that there is any truth whatever to them. Logic alone should tell you they're bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution .
And your " effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry " is entirely bogus .
It is a positive effect , not a negative one .
Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website , yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list .
Care to explain that one , Einstein ? He explains why in the forward to his book Little Brother .
There 's no way you 're going to buy a book by an author you 've never heard of , but there 's no risk in checking one out from the library ( there are way more than 100K libraries , each with a copy for everyone to check out and read ) , and if you like the author 's work , THEN you 're likely to buy.Nobody ever went broke from piracy , but many , many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity .
Your argument is as bogus as Jack Valenti 's " the VCR tape is to the movie industry what Jack the Ripper is to women " .
You see how that one worked out.Valenti 's and your statements are entirely false , have been proven false , and there is not one shred of evidence that there is any truth whatever to them .
Logic alone should tell you they 're bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing)He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution.
And your "effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry" is entirely bogus.
It is a positive effect, not a negative one.
Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list.
Care to explain that one, Einstein?He explains why in the forward to his book Little Brother.
There's no way you're going to buy a book by an author you've never heard of, but there's no risk in checking one out from the library (there are way more than 100K libraries, each with a copy for everyone to check out and read), and if you like the author's work, THEN you're likely to buy.Nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many, many artists and authors have gone hungry from obscurity.
Your argument is as bogus as Jack Valenti's "the VCR tape is to the movie industry what Jack the Ripper is to women".
You see how that one worked out.Valenti's and your statements are entirely false, have been proven false, and there is not one shred of evidence that there is any truth whatever to them.
Logic alone should tell you they're bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609814</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>UnderCoverPenguin</author>
	<datestamp>1262254140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And, the publishers see nothing wrong with this because they want you to have to repurchase your favorite books rather than keep them. (Not that they will necessarily keep those books available. They may be just data, but they consume server resources)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And , the publishers see nothing wrong with this because they want you to have to repurchase your favorite books rather than keep them .
( Not that they will necessarily keep those books available .
They may be just data , but they consume server resources )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And, the publishers see nothing wrong with this because they want you to have to repurchase your favorite books rather than keep them.
(Not that they will necessarily keep those books available.
They may be just data, but they consume server resources)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605720</id>
	<title>Re:Zhnore...</title>
	<author>Rolgar</author>
	<datestamp>1262278020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Luther intentionally altered the content of the Bible to make it say what he wanted it to say by removing several Old Testament books and altering a phrase of the New Testament so that he could claim Christians could be certain of salvation based on adhering to a particular belief instead of having to act like a Christian from the time of conversion until death. The Church to this day reserves the right to declare that some writings are OK to be read by Catholics, and others are not. However, scholars (formal or informal) who need or wish to be aware of these writings can and do read these. The list is a strong recommendation against untrained people reading materials that have either intentional on unintentional errors that may mislead them by stating things that are clearly not true.</p><p>It seems to me that many around here would like to have this or stronger powers over writings by Creationists and I can't say I'd disagree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Luther intentionally altered the content of the Bible to make it say what he wanted it to say by removing several Old Testament books and altering a phrase of the New Testament so that he could claim Christians could be certain of salvation based on adhering to a particular belief instead of having to act like a Christian from the time of conversion until death .
The Church to this day reserves the right to declare that some writings are OK to be read by Catholics , and others are not .
However , scholars ( formal or informal ) who need or wish to be aware of these writings can and do read these .
The list is a strong recommendation against untrained people reading materials that have either intentional on unintentional errors that may mislead them by stating things that are clearly not true.It seems to me that many around here would like to have this or stronger powers over writings by Creationists and I ca n't say I 'd disagree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Luther intentionally altered the content of the Bible to make it say what he wanted it to say by removing several Old Testament books and altering a phrase of the New Testament so that he could claim Christians could be certain of salvation based on adhering to a particular belief instead of having to act like a Christian from the time of conversion until death.
The Church to this day reserves the right to declare that some writings are OK to be read by Catholics, and others are not.
However, scholars (formal or informal) who need or wish to be aware of these writings can and do read these.
The list is a strong recommendation against untrained people reading materials that have either intentional on unintentional errors that may mislead them by stating things that are clearly not true.It seems to me that many around here would like to have this or stronger powers over writings by Creationists and I can't say I'd disagree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605210</id>
	<title>Re:too much knowledge out there</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1262275260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned way</i></p><p>Is there something magic about your ebook that lets you read it faster than a paper book? There has always been too much to take it all in, and the limiiting factor isn't and wasn't technology, it's how fast you can read and how much time you have to do the reading.</p><p>Isn't your kitchen a clutter and storage nightmare? Why not get rid of all those dishes and cooking utensils and just eat preprocessed food? It's much more convinient and you don't have all that clutter in your kitchen.</p><p>I've been buying books and music for fifty years, and it hasn't been a storage or clutter nightmare at all. My books and records and so forth are among my most prized posessions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tend to agree with him some , but there is simply too much music , art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned wayIs there something magic about your ebook that lets you read it faster than a paper book ?
There has always been too much to take it all in , and the limiiting factor is n't and was n't technology , it 's how fast you can read and how much time you have to do the reading.Is n't your kitchen a clutter and storage nightmare ?
Why not get rid of all those dishes and cooking utensils and just eat preprocessed food ?
It 's much more convinient and you do n't have all that clutter in your kitchen.I 've been buying books and music for fifty years , and it has n't been a storage or clutter nightmare at all .
My books and records and so forth are among my most prized posessions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tend to agree with him some, but there is simply too much music, art and knowledge out there to take in the old fashioned wayIs there something magic about your ebook that lets you read it faster than a paper book?
There has always been too much to take it all in, and the limiiting factor isn't and wasn't technology, it's how fast you can read and how much time you have to do the reading.Isn't your kitchen a clutter and storage nightmare?
Why not get rid of all those dishes and cooking utensils and just eat preprocessed food?
It's much more convinient and you don't have all that clutter in your kitchen.I've been buying books and music for fifty years, and it hasn't been a storage or clutter nightmare at all.
My books and records and so forth are among my most prized posessions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607612</id>
	<title>Re:The most important part of a digital book</title>
	<author>HeckRuler</author>
	<datestamp>1262285820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Libraries.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Libraries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Libraries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604778</id>
	<title>A problem, not a feature</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262272200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The ability to loan our books to more than one person at once is a feature, not a bug."</p><p>What if I loan it to everyone? Poking at the evil publishers is one thing, coming up with realistic solutions another. Sadly these seem to be mutually exclusive for a lot of people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The ability to loan our books to more than one person at once is a feature , not a bug .
" What if I loan it to everyone ?
Poking at the evil publishers is one thing , coming up with realistic solutions another .
Sadly these seem to be mutually exclusive for a lot of people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The ability to loan our books to more than one person at once is a feature, not a bug.
"What if I loan it to everyone?
Poking at the evil publishers is one thing, coming up with realistic solutions another.
Sadly these seem to be mutually exclusive for a lot of people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607990</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>RAMMS+EIN</author>
	<datestamp>1262287260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>``A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM! If you give it away, you can't read it anymore. It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that). Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?''</p><p>There is a very important difference, though. DRM doesn't actually make it harder to copy the bits. It makes it harder to use them legitimately. If DRM applied to books, it would be easy to copy them, but you would only be able to read them using special glasses, and only be allowed to read it using approved glasses. It would be illegal to manufacture, use, or distribute alternative glasses that would enable you to read the book.</p><p>DRM is advertised as a means to prevent copying, but what it really prevents is normal usage. Illegal copying can continue as usual, but legitimate customers are hosed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>` ` A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM !
If you give it away , you ca n't read it anymore .
It ca n't easily be copied ( it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that ) .
Is n't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM ?
''There is a very important difference , though .
DRM does n't actually make it harder to copy the bits .
It makes it harder to use them legitimately .
If DRM applied to books , it would be easy to copy them , but you would only be able to read them using special glasses , and only be allowed to read it using approved glasses .
It would be illegal to manufacture , use , or distribute alternative glasses that would enable you to read the book.DRM is advertised as a means to prevent copying , but what it really prevents is normal usage .
Illegal copying can continue as usual , but legitimate customers are hosed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>``A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!
If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.
It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that).
Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?
''There is a very important difference, though.
DRM doesn't actually make it harder to copy the bits.
It makes it harder to use them legitimately.
If DRM applied to books, it would be easy to copy them, but you would only be able to read them using special glasses, and only be allowed to read it using approved glasses.
It would be illegal to manufacture, use, or distribute alternative glasses that would enable you to read the book.DRM is advertised as a means to prevent copying, but what it really prevents is normal usage.
Illegal copying can continue as usual, but legitimate customers are hosed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606432</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>agoliveira</author>
	<datestamp>1262281560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say "he's an expert on nothing" but one does not have to have a PHD to say meaningful things. If you disagree with his opinions, that's perfectly fine, I don't agree with many of them myself, but all you have done is to attack the guy (ad hominem). Instead, why don't you reply to his arguments and explain why "his grasp of law and legal history is laughable"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say " he 's an expert on nothing " but one does not have to have a PHD to say meaningful things .
If you disagree with his opinions , that 's perfectly fine , I do n't agree with many of them myself , but all you have done is to attack the guy ( ad hominem ) .
Instead , why do n't you reply to his arguments and explain why " his grasp of law and legal history is laughable " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say "he's an expert on nothing" but one does not have to have a PHD to say meaningful things.
If you disagree with his opinions, that's perfectly fine, I don't agree with many of them myself, but all you have done is to attack the guy (ad hominem).
Instead, why don't you reply to his arguments and explain why "his grasp of law and legal history is laughable"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604754</id>
	<title>Amazon and the Kindle have killed the bookstore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262271960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is a quote from one of Seth Godin's recent blog entries titled "It's not the rats you need to worry about" (http://bit.ly/8RdTE4) I love my books and they can't have them until they pry them from my cold, dead hand! I used to love the idea of e-books and still own many. But I'll stick to the Baen free library (http://www.baen.com/library/) and their http://www.webscription.net. All ebooks in many formats with *no* DRM ever. Karen Bowden</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is a quote from one of Seth Godin 's recent blog entries titled " It 's not the rats you need to worry about " ( http : //bit.ly/8RdTE4 ) I love my books and they ca n't have them until they pry them from my cold , dead hand !
I used to love the idea of e-books and still own many .
But I 'll stick to the Baen free library ( http : //www.baen.com/library/ ) and their http : //www.webscription.net .
All ebooks in many formats with * no * DRM ever .
Karen Bowden</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is a quote from one of Seth Godin's recent blog entries titled "It's not the rats you need to worry about" (http://bit.ly/8RdTE4) I love my books and they can't have them until they pry them from my cold, dead hand!
I used to love the idea of e-books and still own many.
But I'll stick to the Baen free library (http://www.baen.com/library/) and their http://www.webscription.net.
All ebooks in many formats with *no* DRM ever.
Karen Bowden
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608932</id>
	<title>Wrong.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262292120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That&rsquo;s <strong>author&rsquo;s right</strong>.</p><p>Copyright is the right to copy. To publish. Given by the author to the publisher. And a relatively recent invention.</p><p>Of course they both exist, based on the assumption that an idea is also a physical product. Which obviously is bullshit, and therefore the whole reverse pyramids built on top are bullshit too.</p><p>I&rsquo;m planning on using the following method for future projects:<br>- Instead of pitching my idea to a publisher, I pitch it to the general public.<br>- It will include a clear list of requirements, just like with a publisher.<br>- Now people can, over a system similar to PayPal, pre-order/finance that game. BUT they don&rsquo;t actually pay anything. We just make a simple contract (no stupid giant list of terms!!) that if I fulfill the requirements, they will pay that amount.<br>- They can themselves decide, how much they want to pay/invest.<br>- With that contractual commitment, I can e.g. go to a bank, and lend me the required money. (Which always [including interest] has to be smaller than the actual committed money, for me to make a profit too.)<br>- The project will go in cycles, like the spiral model. In a prototype-based, test-driven way.<br>- When all the requirements are fulfilled, I create a new pitch, with perhaps a trailer, and everything.<br>- Then I listen to the new input of the people, and create a new list of requirements.<br>- People can then, based on my bigger commitment, also make bigger commitments. (E.g. raise it from $5 to $10.)<br>- If I can not continue to work on the project, with the money that that gives me, I have to A) make a better pitch, B) commit to bigger goals, C) market it to more people.<br>- I will always be completely honest and open to my customers. I try to be someone that gets payed because people think I <em>deserve</em> it. Not because of some nasty trickery/fraud/EA.<br><strong>And now the kicker:</strong><br>- If the game comes out, those who committed to paying, will actually <em>own</em> the game! Just like a publisher. They are the only ones who are getting a copy.<br>- They are free to do with it, <em>whatever they like</em>. Full stop. If someone else wants it too, they can themselves decide, if they want to make it a business, and sell it. Or if they want to give it away to good friends. (Who then of course can sell it themselves, if they find someone who buys it.)</p><p>I think that model is more fitting to what software actually is: Information, that resulted from a <em>service</em>.<br>You see, how far away from concepts like &ldquo;copyright&rdquo; that is, and how little those concepts are actually needed.</p><p>I await you comments on how this whole idea is horrible, idiotic and will never ever work.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;))<br>(Then I&rsquo;ll learn from you, if you made constructive critique, and laugh at you, if you didn&rsquo;t<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That    s author    s right.Copyright is the right to copy .
To publish .
Given by the author to the publisher .
And a relatively recent invention.Of course they both exist , based on the assumption that an idea is also a physical product .
Which obviously is bullshit , and therefore the whole reverse pyramids built on top are bullshit too.I    m planning on using the following method for future projects : - Instead of pitching my idea to a publisher , I pitch it to the general public.- It will include a clear list of requirements , just like with a publisher.- Now people can , over a system similar to PayPal , pre-order/finance that game .
BUT they don    t actually pay anything .
We just make a simple contract ( no stupid giant list of terms ! !
) that if I fulfill the requirements , they will pay that amount.- They can themselves decide , how much they want to pay/invest.- With that contractual commitment , I can e.g .
go to a bank , and lend me the required money .
( Which always [ including interest ] has to be smaller than the actual committed money , for me to make a profit too .
) - The project will go in cycles , like the spiral model .
In a prototype-based , test-driven way.- When all the requirements are fulfilled , I create a new pitch , with perhaps a trailer , and everything.- Then I listen to the new input of the people , and create a new list of requirements.- People can then , based on my bigger commitment , also make bigger commitments .
( E.g. raise it from $ 5 to $ 10 .
) - If I can not continue to work on the project , with the money that that gives me , I have to A ) make a better pitch , B ) commit to bigger goals , C ) market it to more people.- I will always be completely honest and open to my customers .
I try to be someone that gets payed because people think I deserve it .
Not because of some nasty trickery/fraud/EA.And now the kicker : - If the game comes out , those who committed to paying , will actually own the game !
Just like a publisher .
They are the only ones who are getting a copy.- They are free to do with it , whatever they like .
Full stop .
If someone else wants it too , they can themselves decide , if they want to make it a business , and sell it .
Or if they want to give it away to good friends .
( Who then of course can sell it themselves , if they find someone who buys it .
) I think that model is more fitting to what software actually is : Information , that resulted from a service.You see , how far away from concepts like    copyright    that is , and how little those concepts are actually needed.I await you comments on how this whole idea is horrible , idiotic and will never ever work .
; ) ) ( Then I    ll learn from you , if you made constructive critique , and laugh at you , if you didn    t ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That’s author’s right.Copyright is the right to copy.
To publish.
Given by the author to the publisher.
And a relatively recent invention.Of course they both exist, based on the assumption that an idea is also a physical product.
Which obviously is bullshit, and therefore the whole reverse pyramids built on top are bullshit too.I’m planning on using the following method for future projects:- Instead of pitching my idea to a publisher, I pitch it to the general public.- It will include a clear list of requirements, just like with a publisher.- Now people can, over a system similar to PayPal, pre-order/finance that game.
BUT they don’t actually pay anything.
We just make a simple contract (no stupid giant list of terms!!
) that if I fulfill the requirements, they will pay that amount.- They can themselves decide, how much they want to pay/invest.- With that contractual commitment, I can e.g.
go to a bank, and lend me the required money.
(Which always [including interest] has to be smaller than the actual committed money, for me to make a profit too.
)- The project will go in cycles, like the spiral model.
In a prototype-based, test-driven way.- When all the requirements are fulfilled, I create a new pitch, with perhaps a trailer, and everything.- Then I listen to the new input of the people, and create a new list of requirements.- People can then, based on my bigger commitment, also make bigger commitments.
(E.g. raise it from $5 to $10.
)- If I can not continue to work on the project, with the money that that gives me, I have to A) make a better pitch, B) commit to bigger goals, C) market it to more people.- I will always be completely honest and open to my customers.
I try to be someone that gets payed because people think I deserve it.
Not because of some nasty trickery/fraud/EA.And now the kicker:- If the game comes out, those who committed to paying, will actually own the game!
Just like a publisher.
They are the only ones who are getting a copy.- They are free to do with it, whatever they like.
Full stop.
If someone else wants it too, they can themselves decide, if they want to make it a business, and sell it.
Or if they want to give it away to good friends.
(Who then of course can sell it themselves, if they find someone who buys it.
)I think that model is more fitting to what software actually is: Information, that resulted from a service.You see, how far away from concepts like “copyright” that is, and how little those concepts are actually needed.I await you comments on how this whole idea is horrible, idiotic and will never ever work.
;))(Then I’ll learn from you, if you made constructive critique, and laugh at you, if you didn’t ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605228</id>
	<title>The same should go for ALL media and software</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1262275320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I simply do not see why the tenants of book ownership shouldn't also carry over for music and video ownership as well.  Just as I like decorating my bookshelf with books, I also like decorating my DVD shelf with DVDs.  That doesn't mean I watch the DVDs... I prefer to rip them and watch them from my mediagate device.  Same goes for music.  Software should either be protected by copyright or by patent, but not both.  That's just a sick perversion of intellectual property protection.  Frankly, I lean in favor of copyright protection, but software should not be allowed to disable itself or protect itself in any way -- that's just "booby-trap-ware" and should be illegal as it deprives legal owners of their rights which should not be limited by the seller.</p><p>The destruction of the book may well be the wake-up call to the problem of all current copyright protection screw jobs we are experiencing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I simply do not see why the tenants of book ownership should n't also carry over for music and video ownership as well .
Just as I like decorating my bookshelf with books , I also like decorating my DVD shelf with DVDs .
That does n't mean I watch the DVDs... I prefer to rip them and watch them from my mediagate device .
Same goes for music .
Software should either be protected by copyright or by patent , but not both .
That 's just a sick perversion of intellectual property protection .
Frankly , I lean in favor of copyright protection , but software should not be allowed to disable itself or protect itself in any way -- that 's just " booby-trap-ware " and should be illegal as it deprives legal owners of their rights which should not be limited by the seller.The destruction of the book may well be the wake-up call to the problem of all current copyright protection screw jobs we are experiencing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I simply do not see why the tenants of book ownership shouldn't also carry over for music and video ownership as well.
Just as I like decorating my bookshelf with books, I also like decorating my DVD shelf with DVDs.
That doesn't mean I watch the DVDs... I prefer to rip them and watch them from my mediagate device.
Same goes for music.
Software should either be protected by copyright or by patent, but not both.
That's just a sick perversion of intellectual property protection.
Frankly, I lean in favor of copyright protection, but software should not be allowed to disable itself or protect itself in any way -- that's just "booby-trap-ware" and should be illegal as it deprives legal owners of their rights which should not be limited by the seller.The destruction of the book may well be the wake-up call to the problem of all current copyright protection screw jobs we are experiencing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30612694</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe if enough people are bitten...?</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1262287380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer's devices</p></div></blockquote><p>Um, except that statement isn't true.  People who had legit copies weren't affected.</p><p>They only deleted copies from one vendor who was committing copyright infringement, because 1984 is still under the excessively long US copyright.</p><p>On the other hand, anyone sufficiently paranoid to back up their files didn't lose anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer 's devicesUm , except that statement is n't true .
People who had legit copies were n't affected.They only deleted copies from one vendor who was committing copyright infringement , because 1984 is still under the excessively long US copyright.On the other hand , anyone sufficiently paranoid to back up their files did n't lose anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer's devicesUm, except that statement isn't true.
People who had legit copies weren't affected.They only deleted copies from one vendor who was committing copyright infringement, because 1984 is still under the excessively long US copyright.On the other hand, anyone sufficiently paranoid to back up their files didn't lose anything.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605620</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262277360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That isn't DRM, it's a consequence of the medium.  Your rights to do whatever you want with it aren't restricted in any way similar to conventional DRM systems.  If you had a book that couldn't be read unless you called up the company for a key, then it would be something akin to DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is n't DRM , it 's a consequence of the medium .
Your rights to do whatever you want with it are n't restricted in any way similar to conventional DRM systems .
If you had a book that could n't be read unless you called up the company for a key , then it would be something akin to DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That isn't DRM, it's a consequence of the medium.
Your rights to do whatever you want with it aren't restricted in any way similar to conventional DRM systems.
If you had a book that couldn't be read unless you called up the company for a key, then it would be something akin to DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607014</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1262283480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects? What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual, you know, effort than what I do.</p></div></blockquote><p>By engaging in the literary version of what a young Hollywood starlet does, almost show a little tit (pander to your audiences biases), tease 'em with some bikini shots (pander to their biases more), etc... etc...  It's kinda like karma whoring on Slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects ?
What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual , you know , effort than what I do.By engaging in the literary version of what a young Hollywood starlet does , almost show a little tit ( pander to your audiences biases ) , tease 'em with some bikini shots ( pander to their biases more ) , etc... etc... It 's kinda like karma whoring on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do I get people to pay me for saying stupid things about fashionable subjects?
What he does is way more glamorous and takes way less actual, you know, effort than what I do.By engaging in the literary version of what a young Hollywood starlet does, almost show a little tit (pander to your audiences biases), tease 'em with some bikini shots (pander to their biases more), etc... etc...  It's kinda like karma whoring on Slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610670</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262260080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument.</p></div><p>No they don't. The physical limitations and wearing out of books is analogous to a hard drive failure (or other storage medium for digital books). DRM is more similar to deliberately altering the book so that it self destructs as opposed to normal wear and tear.</p><p>I don't know why you haven't been able to differentiate between limitations of the media and deliberate sabotage. Think about it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument.No they do n't .
The physical limitations and wearing out of books is analogous to a hard drive failure ( or other storage medium for digital books ) .
DRM is more similar to deliberately altering the book so that it self destructs as opposed to normal wear and tear.I do n't know why you have n't been able to differentiate between limitations of the media and deliberate sabotage .
Think about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument.No they don't.
The physical limitations and wearing out of books is analogous to a hard drive failure (or other storage medium for digital books).
DRM is more similar to deliberately altering the book so that it self destructs as opposed to normal wear and tear.I don't know why you haven't been able to differentiate between limitations of the media and deliberate sabotage.
Think about it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605106</id>
	<title>Re:I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>betterunixthanunix</author>
	<datestamp>1262274360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!"<br> <br>

I would not refer to it as DRM since there is nothing digital about it and nothing is being "managed."<br> <br>

"If you give it away, you can't read it anymore."<br> <br>

Yes, but that has nothing to do with DRM.  With an ebook, you are not really "giving it away," you are giving a copy of the book to someone, and that does not deprive you of the book; this is equally true of a paper book.  What restriction technologies are used for in this case is to deceive the user into thinking that they are giving away their book to a friend, which is not at all what they are doing.<br> <br>

"Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?"<br> <br>

I would say that it goes even further than that.  As far as I can tell, the publishers are using DRM not just to keep us all dependent on them, but to <b>increase</b> that dependence.  Restriction technologies can do a lot more than just prevent copying, and publishers have indicated in the past that they are planning to use DRM to overcome certain "problems."<br> <br>

For example, textbook publishers hate the idea of used book sales, and they are even more worried about it than they are about filesharing.  Some time ago, the NY Times ran an article about this issue, and about how publishers try to thwart such sales.  The obvious stuff, like changing around problem sets and refusing to sell older editions of the books, was all covered, but then they started discussing some future plans, which included the possibility of creating ebooks that can only be accessed for a limited period of time.<br> <br>

From where I sit, DRM is about ensuring that a certain group of rich and powerful members of society can remain rich and powerful.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM !
" I would not refer to it as DRM since there is nothing digital about it and nothing is being " managed .
" " If you give it away , you ca n't read it anymore .
" Yes , but that has nothing to do with DRM .
With an ebook , you are not really " giving it away , " you are giving a copy of the book to someone , and that does not deprive you of the book ; this is equally true of a paper book .
What restriction technologies are used for in this case is to deceive the user into thinking that they are giving away their book to a friend , which is not at all what they are doing .
" Is n't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM ?
" I would say that it goes even further than that .
As far as I can tell , the publishers are using DRM not just to keep us all dependent on them , but to increase that dependence .
Restriction technologies can do a lot more than just prevent copying , and publishers have indicated in the past that they are planning to use DRM to overcome certain " problems .
" For example , textbook publishers hate the idea of used book sales , and they are even more worried about it than they are about filesharing .
Some time ago , the NY Times ran an article about this issue , and about how publishers try to thwart such sales .
The obvious stuff , like changing around problem sets and refusing to sell older editions of the books , was all covered , but then they started discussing some future plans , which included the possibility of creating ebooks that can only be accessed for a limited period of time .
From where I sit , DRM is about ensuring that a certain group of rich and powerful members of society can remain rich and powerful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!
" 

I would not refer to it as DRM since there is nothing digital about it and nothing is being "managed.
" 

"If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.
" 

Yes, but that has nothing to do with DRM.
With an ebook, you are not really "giving it away," you are giving a copy of the book to someone, and that does not deprive you of the book; this is equally true of a paper book.
What restriction technologies are used for in this case is to deceive the user into thinking that they are giving away their book to a friend, which is not at all what they are doing.
"Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?
" 

I would say that it goes even further than that.
As far as I can tell, the publishers are using DRM not just to keep us all dependent on them, but to increase that dependence.
Restriction technologies can do a lot more than just prevent copying, and publishers have indicated in the past that they are planning to use DRM to overcome certain "problems.
" 

For example, textbook publishers hate the idea of used book sales, and they are even more worried about it than they are about filesharing.
Some time ago, the NY Times ran an article about this issue, and about how publishers try to thwart such sales.
The obvious stuff, like changing around problem sets and refusing to sell older editions of the books, was all covered, but then they started discussing some future plans, which included the possibility of creating ebooks that can only be accessed for a limited period of time.
From where I sit, DRM is about ensuring that a certain group of rich and powerful members of society can remain rich and powerful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548</id>
	<title>My local library</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1262270040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I appreciate reading books I much more enjoying using my local public library than spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. well anything.  And yes I know I am paying for those books through my taxes, but the range and depth of the libraries catalog far surpasses anything I could achieve if I spent the same amount of money privately.</p><p> So I am confused now - I support reading books, but don't support maintaining a huge private library.  Does this mean I am bent on destroying o supporting books???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I appreciate reading books I much more enjoying using my local public library than spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than .. well anything .
And yes I know I am paying for those books through my taxes , but the range and depth of the libraries catalog far surpasses anything I could achieve if I spent the same amount of money privately .
So I am confused now - I support reading books , but do n't support maintaining a huge private library .
Does this mean I am bent on destroying o supporting books ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I appreciate reading books I much more enjoying using my local public library than spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than .. well anything.
And yes I know I am paying for those books through my taxes, but the range and depth of the libraries catalog far surpasses anything I could achieve if I spent the same amount of money privately.
So I am confused now - I support reading books, but don't support maintaining a huge private library.
Does this mean I am bent on destroying o supporting books??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609402</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone explain to me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262251740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man, rather than the message he is addressing?</p></div><p>Simple:  it's because the people who don't like what he's saying have no other argument.</p><p>How do we know this?  Because if they *did* have an argument, they'd use it.  QED.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man , rather than the message he is addressing ? Simple : it 's because the people who do n't like what he 's saying have no other argument.How do we know this ?
Because if they * did * have an argument , they 'd use it .
QED .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can someone explain to me why every discussion related to Cory Doctorow always descends into arguing over the man, rather than the message he is addressing?Simple:  it's because the people who don't like what he's saying have no other argument.How do we know this?
Because if they *did* have an argument, they'd use it.
QED.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605836</id>
	<title>Re:Give Away a PHYSICAL Copy, Sure</title>
	<author>webdog314</author>
	<datestamp>1262278560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing)</i> </p><p>He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution. And your "effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry" is entirely bogus. It is a positive effect, not a negative one. Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list. Care to explain that one, Einstein?</p></div><p>Sure, he's on the bestseller list because A: he's a very good writer, B: he has a crackerjack publisher who is willing to take risks, and C: he knows that the majority of those who read books are still mostly clueless when it comes to pirating digital books on the net. His books work this way because he is one of the only people doing it. If his idea caught on and everyone started giving away free digital copies of their books, I highly doubt most people would bother to buy them anymore. The concept works as an <b>marketing</b> tool the same way that any marketing concept works. As soon as it's stale, it's stops being effective. More so, the market is changing radically. Digital readers are coming out in droves, and people are very much more receptive to viewing books digitally than they were even two years ago. Sure, I may still want a physical copy of a good book for my library, but even that is becoming less appealing as the publishing industry "compensates" for the supposed lost revenue from piracy by raising yet again the price of paper books.<br> <br>

Logic alone is often completely trumped by pop market culture...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cory 's Sacred Ancestors ( or whoever the hell he was referencing ) He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution .
And your " effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry " is entirely bogus .
It is a positive effect , not a negative one .
Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website , yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list .
Care to explain that one , Einstein ? Sure , he 's on the bestseller list because A : he 's a very good writer , B : he has a crackerjack publisher who is willing to take risks , and C : he knows that the majority of those who read books are still mostly clueless when it comes to pirating digital books on the net .
His books work this way because he is one of the only people doing it .
If his idea caught on and everyone started giving away free digital copies of their books , I highly doubt most people would bother to buy them anymore .
The concept works as an marketing tool the same way that any marketing concept works .
As soon as it 's stale , it 's stops being effective .
More so , the market is changing radically .
Digital readers are coming out in droves , and people are very much more receptive to viewing books digitally than they were even two years ago .
Sure , I may still want a physical copy of a good book for my library , but even that is becoming less appealing as the publishing industry " compensates " for the supposed lost revenue from piracy by raising yet again the price of paper books .
Logic alone is often completely trumped by pop market culture.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Cory's Sacred Ancestors (or whoever the hell he was referencing) He was referencing the founders of the United States who write its constitution.
And your "effect the scanning and distribution of a book to 100,000 strangers on the Internet would have on the publishing industry" is entirely bogus.
It is a positive effect, not a negative one.
Doctorow gives his books away for free on his website, yet is on the New Your Times bestseller list.
Care to explain that one, Einstein?Sure, he's on the bestseller list because A: he's a very good writer, B: he has a crackerjack publisher who is willing to take risks, and C: he knows that the majority of those who read books are still mostly clueless when it comes to pirating digital books on the net.
His books work this way because he is one of the only people doing it.
If his idea caught on and everyone started giving away free digital copies of their books, I highly doubt most people would bother to buy them anymore.
The concept works as an marketing tool the same way that any marketing concept works.
As soon as it's stale, it's stops being effective.
More so, the market is changing radically.
Digital readers are coming out in droves, and people are very much more receptive to viewing books digitally than they were even two years ago.
Sure, I may still want a physical copy of a good book for my library, but even that is becoming less appealing as the publishing industry "compensates" for the supposed lost revenue from piracy by raising yet again the price of paper books.
Logic alone is often completely trumped by pop market culture...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500</id>
	<title>I'm not a fan of DRM but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262269560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM! If you give it away, you can't read it anymore. It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that). Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?</p><p>IMHO though, the world has changed, we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions. So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world, instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM. I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM !
If you give it away , you ca n't read it anymore .
It ca n't easily be copied ( it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that ) .
Is n't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM ? IMHO though , the world has changed , we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions .
So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world , instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM .
I 'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely , there can also be culture , people who make money , artists , and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A physical book has a sort of built-in DRM!
If you give it away, you can't read it anymore.
It can't easily be copied (it requires a lot of scanning and printing to do that).
Isn't that kind of thing also part of the intention of DRM?IMHO though, the world has changed, we now live in a world where information can be copied without any physical restrictions.
So I hope that one day humanity will be able to live in that world, instead of trying to enforce old ways onto us with DRM.
I'm sure that in a world where information can be copied freely, there can also be culture, people who make money, artists, and so on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304</id>
	<title>Re:What happens when the reader breaks ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262280780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me start out by saying that I agree with you.  And it's a good argument - it gets the emotional parts of the issue right out in the open.  However, I see some things here that are going to be used, effectively, as a counter argument:<br> <br>
1. How many books do you own that you can pass on to your children?  How old are those books?<br>
2. Have you ever had a book destroyed through wearing out, getting destroyed by dog, fire, water, etc.?<br>
3. Have you ever lost a book, had it borrowed or stolen?<br> <br>
I'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument.  And the counter argument, pushing the statistical likelihood of a book being lost or destroyed before passing it on, versus the DRM getting screwed up - it's not very powerful.  No one knows the real answer to that question - but people think they do - and so the argument loses those who already have an opinion.<br> <br>
Just some thoughts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me start out by saying that I agree with you .
And it 's a good argument - it gets the emotional parts of the issue right out in the open .
However , I see some things here that are going to be used , effectively , as a counter argument : 1 .
How many books do you own that you can pass on to your children ?
How old are those books ?
2. Have you ever had a book destroyed through wearing out , getting destroyed by dog , fire , water , etc. ?
3. Have you ever lost a book , had it borrowed or stolen ?
I 'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument .
And the counter argument , pushing the statistical likelihood of a book being lost or destroyed before passing it on , versus the DRM getting screwed up - it 's not very powerful .
No one knows the real answer to that question - but people think they do - and so the argument loses those who already have an opinion .
Just some thoughts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me start out by saying that I agree with you.
And it's a good argument - it gets the emotional parts of the issue right out in the open.
However, I see some things here that are going to be used, effectively, as a counter argument: 
1.
How many books do you own that you can pass on to your children?
How old are those books?
2. Have you ever had a book destroyed through wearing out, getting destroyed by dog, fire, water, etc.?
3. Have you ever lost a book, had it borrowed or stolen?
I'm sure you can all see how these questions erode the argument.
And the counter argument, pushing the statistical likelihood of a book being lost or destroyed before passing it on, versus the DRM getting screwed up - it's not very powerful.
No one knows the real answer to that question - but people think they do - and so the argument loses those who already have an opinion.
Just some thoughts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606266</id>
	<title>Think of the archeologists!</title>
	<author>Midnight Thunder</author>
	<datestamp>1262280600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When ever I think of the book being replaced by its digital equivalent, I think of a scenario 200 years from now after a war destroys a whole nation. The people coming in to see what they can find a library with eBook readers and paper books. The paper books are still a little dusty, but everything on that civilisation up to the first decade of the 21st century is documented and available. The eBook readers on the other hand are another story, with publisher no longer in existence and DRM still in place, the content simply complains that the book can't be read dues to "text license expiry". 200 years of information on this society has now been lost to the sands of time.</p><p>Certainly this scenario is a little negative and could occur for other reasons, but the point I am trying to make is that convenience makes for a shitty legacy, especially with DRM in place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When ever I think of the book being replaced by its digital equivalent , I think of a scenario 200 years from now after a war destroys a whole nation .
The people coming in to see what they can find a library with eBook readers and paper books .
The paper books are still a little dusty , but everything on that civilisation up to the first decade of the 21st century is documented and available .
The eBook readers on the other hand are another story , with publisher no longer in existence and DRM still in place , the content simply complains that the book ca n't be read dues to " text license expiry " .
200 years of information on this society has now been lost to the sands of time.Certainly this scenario is a little negative and could occur for other reasons , but the point I am trying to make is that convenience makes for a shitty legacy , especially with DRM in place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When ever I think of the book being replaced by its digital equivalent, I think of a scenario 200 years from now after a war destroys a whole nation.
The people coming in to see what they can find a library with eBook readers and paper books.
The paper books are still a little dusty, but everything on that civilisation up to the first decade of the 21st century is documented and available.
The eBook readers on the other hand are another story, with publisher no longer in existence and DRM still in place, the content simply complains that the book can't be read dues to "text license expiry".
200 years of information on this society has now been lost to the sands of time.Certainly this scenario is a little negative and could occur for other reasons, but the point I am trying to make is that convenience makes for a shitty legacy, especially with DRM in place.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617138</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe if enough people are bitten...?</title>
	<author>uninformedLuddite</author>
	<datestamp>1230813120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The irony of it being 1984 went over most peoples heads</htmltext>
<tokenext>The irony of it being 1984 went over most peoples heads</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The irony of it being 1984 went over most peoples heads</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042</id>
	<title>Maybe if enough people are bitten...?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262279460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer's devices, totally screwing many people up in the process.  Sure the refunded the purchase cost.  Big deal.  They also apologized later for doing it.  But this sent a very clear message that they cannot take back:  They can trash your 'property' on a whim, and there is nothing you can do to prevent it as long as you abide by their DRM restrictions.</p><p>They say they won't do it again.  Sorry, but once trust is lost, is VERY difficult to regain.</p><p>At least, it is for people who actually pay attention and think.  What upsets me the most is that most consumers don't care enough to change their purchasing habits even after they've been bitten.</p><p>Except in very rare circumstances I avoid audio CDs, after what Sony did.  I also don't buy Sony products anymore. Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products, how PS3s are flying off the shelves, it makes it really hard to care.  When the forementioned incident happened with Amazon, schadenfreude is the best description of how I felt.  There have been SO many well reported incidents across SO many industries, that people have effectively waived their right to be outraged when such things happen to them.</p><p>Society at large flat out doesn't care.  Those that know what's going on and care enough to do so will ALWAYS find a way to crack things like DRM so that they can at least protect themselves.  Those that choose to ignore the damage that DRM causes, can go cry in their rooms because they should flat out have known better.</p><p>I can only hope that if enough people get hurt by DRM they will eventually complain loudly enough to stop this nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer 's devices , totally screwing many people up in the process .
Sure the refunded the purchase cost .
Big deal .
They also apologized later for doing it .
But this sent a very clear message that they can not take back : They can trash your 'property ' on a whim , and there is nothing you can do to prevent it as long as you abide by their DRM restrictions.They say they wo n't do it again .
Sorry , but once trust is lost , is VERY difficult to regain.At least , it is for people who actually pay attention and think .
What upsets me the most is that most consumers do n't care enough to change their purchasing habits even after they 've been bitten.Except in very rare circumstances I avoid audio CDs , after what Sony did .
I also do n't buy Sony products anymore .
Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products , how PS3s are flying off the shelves , it makes it really hard to care .
When the forementioned incident happened with Amazon , schadenfreude is the best description of how I felt .
There have been SO many well reported incidents across SO many industries , that people have effectively waived their right to be outraged when such things happen to them.Society at large flat out does n't care .
Those that know what 's going on and care enough to do so will ALWAYS find a way to crack things like DRM so that they can at least protect themselves .
Those that choose to ignore the damage that DRM causes , can go cry in their rooms because they should flat out have known better.I can only hope that if enough people get hurt by DRM they will eventually complain loudly enough to stop this nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a good place to point out that Amazon unilaterally had all copies of 1984 deleted from all customer's devices, totally screwing many people up in the process.
Sure the refunded the purchase cost.
Big deal.
They also apologized later for doing it.
But this sent a very clear message that they cannot take back:  They can trash your 'property' on a whim, and there is nothing you can do to prevent it as long as you abide by their DRM restrictions.They say they won't do it again.
Sorry, but once trust is lost, is VERY difficult to regain.At least, it is for people who actually pay attention and think.
What upsets me the most is that most consumers don't care enough to change their purchasing habits even after they've been bitten.Except in very rare circumstances I avoid audio CDs, after what Sony did.
I also don't buy Sony products anymore.
Sony should have But when I see how many people still purchase Sony products, how PS3s are flying off the shelves, it makes it really hard to care.
When the forementioned incident happened with Amazon, schadenfreude is the best description of how I felt.
There have been SO many well reported incidents across SO many industries, that people have effectively waived their right to be outraged when such things happen to them.Society at large flat out doesn't care.
Those that know what's going on and care enough to do so will ALWAYS find a way to crack things like DRM so that they can at least protect themselves.
Those that choose to ignore the damage that DRM causes, can go cry in their rooms because they should flat out have known better.I can only hope that if enough people get hurt by DRM they will eventually complain loudly enough to stop this nonsense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606616</id>
	<title>To me, it's simple math:</title>
	<author>agoliveira</author>
	<datestamp>1262282100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't buy ebooks that are DRM-crippled. As a matter of fact, I don't buy ebooks unless it's some reference material that needs to be consulted in a regular basis and a search function is a must. For my reading pleasure I aways carry real books albeit the extra volume.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't buy ebooks that are DRM-crippled .
As a matter of fact , I do n't buy ebooks unless it 's some reference material that needs to be consulted in a regular basis and a search function is a must .
For my reading pleasure I aways carry real books albeit the extra volume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't buy ebooks that are DRM-crippled.
As a matter of fact, I don't buy ebooks unless it's some reference material that needs to be consulted in a regular basis and a search function is a must.
For my reading pleasure I aways carry real books albeit the extra volume.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605070</id>
	<title>Re:My local library</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1262274060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. well anything"</p><p>Well, not faster than newspapers, the old-fashioned print kind.<br>They are virtually worthless for anything but packing material, or tinder, or fishwrap mere hours after delivery.</p><p>At least a good book can be sold a few months after being published, sometimes years or even centuries.  But a newspaper?  Grocery stores knew them as more perishable than ice cream on the sidewalk in the summer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than .. well anything " Well , not faster than newspapers , the old-fashioned print kind.They are virtually worthless for anything but packing material , or tinder , or fishwrap mere hours after delivery.At least a good book can be sold a few months after being published , sometimes years or even centuries .
But a newspaper ?
Grocery stores knew them as more perishable than ice cream on the sidewalk in the summer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"spending a shitload of money on books whose value depreciates faster than .. well anything"Well, not faster than newspapers, the old-fashioned print kind.They are virtually worthless for anything but packing material, or tinder, or fishwrap mere hours after delivery.At least a good book can be sold a few months after being published, sometimes years or even centuries.
But a newspaper?
Grocery stores knew them as more perishable than ice cream on the sidewalk in the summer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30612694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_31_0420244_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604402
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605006
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30612694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617138
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608522
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606572
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30617730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604504
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607656
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30608838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604528
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605240
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30610062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604392
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30606422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30607612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_31_0420244.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30605070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30604796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_31_0420244.30609030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
