<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_21_2136238</id>
	<title>ACTA Internet Chapter Leaked &mdash; Bad For Everyone</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266748800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>roju writes <i>"Cory Doctorow is reporting on a <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/21/acta-internet-enforc.html">leaked copy of the 'internet enforcement' portion</a> of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting\_Trade\_Agreement">Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement</a>. He describes it as reading like a 'DMCA-plus' with provisions for third-party liability, digital locks, and 'a duty to technology firms to shut down infringement where they have "actual knowledge" that such is taking place.' For example, this could mean legal responsibility shifting to Apple for customers copying mp3s onto their iPods."</i> Adds an anonymous reader, <i>"Michael Geist points out that the leaks demonstrate that ACTA would create a Global DMCA and <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4808/125/">move toward a three-strikes-and-you're-out system</a>. While the US has claimed that ACTA won't establish a mandatory three strikes system, it specifically uses three-strikes as its model."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>roju writes " Cory Doctorow is reporting on a leaked copy of the 'internet enforcement ' portion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement .
He describes it as reading like a 'DMCA-plus ' with provisions for third-party liability , digital locks , and 'a duty to technology firms to shut down infringement where they have " actual knowledge " that such is taking place .
' For example , this could mean legal responsibility shifting to Apple for customers copying mp3s onto their iPods .
" Adds an anonymous reader , " Michael Geist points out that the leaks demonstrate that ACTA would create a Global DMCA and move toward a three-strikes-and-you 're-out system .
While the US has claimed that ACTA wo n't establish a mandatory three strikes system , it specifically uses three-strikes as its model .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>roju writes "Cory Doctorow is reporting on a leaked copy of the 'internet enforcement' portion of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.
He describes it as reading like a 'DMCA-plus' with provisions for third-party liability, digital locks, and 'a duty to technology firms to shut down infringement where they have "actual knowledge" that such is taking place.
' For example, this could mean legal responsibility shifting to Apple for customers copying mp3s onto their iPods.
" Adds an anonymous reader, "Michael Geist points out that the leaks demonstrate that ACTA would create a Global DMCA and move toward a three-strikes-and-you're-out system.
While the US has claimed that ACTA won't establish a mandatory three strikes system, it specifically uses three-strikes as its model.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</id>
	<title>Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266754260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can't think of anything that fits with the definition of treason better than a system that passes laws that the citizens aren't permitted to know. That immediately removes the incentive for being law abiding since you can't know if you're breaking the law. Anyone enacting or enforcing such laws should be covered by treason laws.</p><p>Can't think of anything more terrifying than threatening to take away a person's ability to communicate, possibly their livelihood without having to PROOVE a crime in court. Enacting such laws is the very definition of terrorism. Where's the anti-terrorism legislation now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't think of anything that fits with the definition of treason better than a system that passes laws that the citizens are n't permitted to know .
That immediately removes the incentive for being law abiding since you ca n't know if you 're breaking the law .
Anyone enacting or enforcing such laws should be covered by treason laws.Ca n't think of anything more terrifying than threatening to take away a person 's ability to communicate , possibly their livelihood without having to PROOVE a crime in court .
Enacting such laws is the very definition of terrorism .
Where 's the anti-terrorism legislation now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't think of anything that fits with the definition of treason better than a system that passes laws that the citizens aren't permitted to know.
That immediately removes the incentive for being law abiding since you can't know if you're breaking the law.
Anyone enacting or enforcing such laws should be covered by treason laws.Can't think of anything more terrifying than threatening to take away a person's ability to communicate, possibly their livelihood without having to PROOVE a crime in court.
Enacting such laws is the very definition of terrorism.
Where's the anti-terrorism legislation now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224280</id>
	<title>This insanity wont stop...</title>
	<author>CondeZer0</author>
	<datestamp>1266762000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>until so called <a href="http://harmful.cat-v.org/economics/intellectual\_property/" title="cat-v.org">'intellectual property' is exposed for the oxymoron that it is</a> [cat-v.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>until so called 'intellectual property ' is exposed for the oxymoron that it is [ cat-v.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>until so called 'intellectual property' is exposed for the oxymoron that it is [cat-v.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225866</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Artemis3</author>
	<datestamp>1266773880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>Do a revolution: call for a People's National Constituent Assembly, tear down corpocracy and bi-partisan power. Instate direct democracy, down with lobbies and corrupt representation. While you are at it, fix copyright, socialize Health Care and Education and have a decent State run system instead of wasting money in wars. Perhaps forbid military forces from invading foreign nations, and stop active undercover messing all over the planet. We might even achieve World Peace then.</li></ul><p>Please read <a href="http://www.t35.com/embeddedart.txt" title="t35.com">Joe Stack suicide note</a> [t35.com]. The terror is the system, Wake up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do a revolution : call for a People 's National Constituent Assembly , tear down corpocracy and bi-partisan power .
Instate direct democracy , down with lobbies and corrupt representation .
While you are at it , fix copyright , socialize Health Care and Education and have a decent State run system instead of wasting money in wars .
Perhaps forbid military forces from invading foreign nations , and stop active undercover messing all over the planet .
We might even achieve World Peace then.Please read Joe Stack suicide note [ t35.com ] .
The terror is the system , Wake up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Do a revolution: call for a People's National Constituent Assembly, tear down corpocracy and bi-partisan power.
Instate direct democracy, down with lobbies and corrupt representation.
While you are at it, fix copyright, socialize Health Care and Education and have a decent State run system instead of wasting money in wars.
Perhaps forbid military forces from invading foreign nations, and stop active undercover messing all over the planet.
We might even achieve World Peace then.Please read Joe Stack suicide note [t35.com].
The terror is the system, Wake up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</id>
	<title>Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously. You want all the world to abide by an anti-piracy measure and don't include the biggest pirate on the planet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
You want all the world to abide by an anti-piracy measure and do n't include the biggest pirate on the planet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
You want all the world to abide by an anti-piracy measure and don't include the biggest pirate on the planet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224190</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>chickenarise</author>
	<datestamp>1266761400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dunno if you've figured this out yet, but our government uses <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">doublespeak</a> [wikipedia.org]. Anti-terrorism <b>IS</b> terrorism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dunno if you 've figured this out yet , but our government uses doublespeak [ wikipedia.org ] .
Anti-terrorism IS terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dunno if you've figured this out yet, but our government uses doublespeak [wikipedia.org].
Anti-terrorism IS terrorism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223622</id>
	<title>So now you know!!</title>
	<author>noz</author>
	<datestamp>1266757440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keeping it secret is a matter of national security when the nation is controlled by private interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keeping it secret is a matter of national security when the nation is controlled by private interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keeping it secret is a matter of national security when the nation is controlled by private interests.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223468</id>
	<title>Brought to you by the folks at Disney</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1266756300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They implemented DMCA in the USA.<br>CD sales plummeted.<br>Not because of pirates.<br>Because of change of tech (legal downloads) and we already have the good music.<br>No need to keep buying it over and over just because they create new file formats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They implemented DMCA in the USA.CD sales plummeted.Not because of pirates.Because of change of tech ( legal downloads ) and we already have the good music.No need to keep buying it over and over just because they create new file formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They implemented DMCA in the USA.CD sales plummeted.Not because of pirates.Because of change of tech (legal downloads) and we already have the good music.No need to keep buying it over and over just because they create new file formats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223166</id>
	<title>Maybe it'll be a good thing...</title>
	<author>No Grand Plan</author>
	<datestamp>1266754440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps this could signal the death knell for the **AAs, the music and movie industries as we know them. I'd love to see people just refusing to buy their crap, not downloading their lousy movies and turning their backs on the whole situation. Only buy CC music, only download and use FOS software and only watch independent (<i>true</i> independent) movies.<br> <br>You may say I'm a dreamer...  but I'm not the only one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps this could signal the death knell for the * * AAs , the music and movie industries as we know them .
I 'd love to see people just refusing to buy their crap , not downloading their lousy movies and turning their backs on the whole situation .
Only buy CC music , only download and use FOS software and only watch independent ( true independent ) movies .
You may say I 'm a dreamer... but I 'm not the only one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps this could signal the death knell for the **AAs, the music and movie industries as we know them.
I'd love to see people just refusing to buy their crap, not downloading their lousy movies and turning their backs on the whole situation.
Only buy CC music, only download and use FOS software and only watch independent (true independent) movies.
You may say I'm a dreamer...  but I'm not the only one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233238</id>
	<title>Re:Canadian solution</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1266868740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I try not to hate Americans, but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it.</p></div><p>
Yeah, because, you know, there are massive protests in American cities right now demanding that other countries adopt our laws and customs. There is a huge, 'write your politician,' campaign where we Americans are demanding that our politicians enforce draconian legislation on the rest of the world. Sheesh!
<br> <br>
I understand you're pissed off but at least take the time to be pissed off at the right folk. It's not Americans that are the problem, it's American politicians. This is the same thing that I tried to explain to every local and world traveler that I met during my visit to New Zealand a week ago. The American People have, essentially, lost control of their government. We write our politicians. We attend local protests and meetings (and then get smeared as being extremist nutjobs). We talk to each other and try to explain to people in the streets the dangers of various legislative maneuvers going on in our government and what not. And, despite all that effort by Americans, our politicians continue to run down certain paths and roads that seem completely FUBARed and unfounded. Hell, every congressional candidate that I have talked to feels as if their sole duty is to give stuff to people asking for it (as in, group X wants new shiny object A, so that's the next best goal of that particular esteemed politician), rather than following a particular ideology (like, I don't know, the Constitution) to make decisions.
<br> <br>
When it comes down to it, there is quite a lively faction of Americans that are just as pissed off at their government and the bullshit it has been spewing forth for the last umpteen years as you are. Unfortunately, trying to get any change effected in a government that represents millions of extraordinarily different people with extraordinarily different agendas is very near impossible. As such, those who have managed to slip their feet into the slippers of power, currently, are able to run amok and do, pretty much, whatever they damn well please, with the full weight of the American military at their disposal.
<br> <br>
So please, I reiterate, if you are pissed off at Americans, then at least be rational enough to be pissed off at the right Americans (the politicians) and do not exclude those of us in this country who are trying to fight the same fight that you are. If it comes down to it, you might find us to be quite valuable allies.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I try not to hate Americans , but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it .
Yeah , because , you know , there are massive protests in American cities right now demanding that other countries adopt our laws and customs .
There is a huge , 'write your politician, ' campaign where we Americans are demanding that our politicians enforce draconian legislation on the rest of the world .
Sheesh ! I understand you 're pissed off but at least take the time to be pissed off at the right folk .
It 's not Americans that are the problem , it 's American politicians .
This is the same thing that I tried to explain to every local and world traveler that I met during my visit to New Zealand a week ago .
The American People have , essentially , lost control of their government .
We write our politicians .
We attend local protests and meetings ( and then get smeared as being extremist nutjobs ) .
We talk to each other and try to explain to people in the streets the dangers of various legislative maneuvers going on in our government and what not .
And , despite all that effort by Americans , our politicians continue to run down certain paths and roads that seem completely FUBARed and unfounded .
Hell , every congressional candidate that I have talked to feels as if their sole duty is to give stuff to people asking for it ( as in , group X wants new shiny object A , so that 's the next best goal of that particular esteemed politician ) , rather than following a particular ideology ( like , I do n't know , the Constitution ) to make decisions .
When it comes down to it , there is quite a lively faction of Americans that are just as pissed off at their government and the bullshit it has been spewing forth for the last umpteen years as you are .
Unfortunately , trying to get any change effected in a government that represents millions of extraordinarily different people with extraordinarily different agendas is very near impossible .
As such , those who have managed to slip their feet into the slippers of power , currently , are able to run amok and do , pretty much , whatever they damn well please , with the full weight of the American military at their disposal .
So please , I reiterate , if you are pissed off at Americans , then at least be rational enough to be pissed off at the right Americans ( the politicians ) and do not exclude those of us in this country who are trying to fight the same fight that you are .
If it comes down to it , you might find us to be quite valuable allies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I try not to hate Americans, but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it.
Yeah, because, you know, there are massive protests in American cities right now demanding that other countries adopt our laws and customs.
There is a huge, 'write your politician,' campaign where we Americans are demanding that our politicians enforce draconian legislation on the rest of the world.
Sheesh!
 
I understand you're pissed off but at least take the time to be pissed off at the right folk.
It's not Americans that are the problem, it's American politicians.
This is the same thing that I tried to explain to every local and world traveler that I met during my visit to New Zealand a week ago.
The American People have, essentially, lost control of their government.
We write our politicians.
We attend local protests and meetings (and then get smeared as being extremist nutjobs).
We talk to each other and try to explain to people in the streets the dangers of various legislative maneuvers going on in our government and what not.
And, despite all that effort by Americans, our politicians continue to run down certain paths and roads that seem completely FUBARed and unfounded.
Hell, every congressional candidate that I have talked to feels as if their sole duty is to give stuff to people asking for it (as in, group X wants new shiny object A, so that's the next best goal of that particular esteemed politician), rather than following a particular ideology (like, I don't know, the Constitution) to make decisions.
When it comes down to it, there is quite a lively faction of Americans that are just as pissed off at their government and the bullshit it has been spewing forth for the last umpteen years as you are.
Unfortunately, trying to get any change effected in a government that represents millions of extraordinarily different people with extraordinarily different agendas is very near impossible.
As such, those who have managed to slip their feet into the slippers of power, currently, are able to run amok and do, pretty much, whatever they damn well please, with the full weight of the American military at their disposal.
So please, I reiterate, if you are pissed off at Americans, then at least be rational enough to be pissed off at the right Americans (the politicians) and do not exclude those of us in this country who are trying to fight the same fight that you are.
If it comes down to it, you might find us to be quite valuable allies.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223010</id>
	<title>been accused counts as a strike = easy DOS</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1266753480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>been accused counts as a strike = easy DOS</p><p>Do like what you market competition is doing just a accused them and watch how they can't do any work any more then they get shut off.</p><p>some get's layed off then to get back they just accused them.</p><p>You make your own art / music and you trun down a deal and they just trun around and accused you</p><p>You give a bad review of a moive / game / any other thing and they just accused you and shut down your web site.</p><p>You say that x is doing a bad job and he shuts you down.</p><p>This like a red light cameras with no court that goes off on yellow and goes off right before you hit the stop line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>been accused counts as a strike = easy DOSDo like what you market competition is doing just a accused them and watch how they ca n't do any work any more then they get shut off.some get 's layed off then to get back they just accused them.You make your own art / music and you trun down a deal and they just trun around and accused youYou give a bad review of a moive / game / any other thing and they just accused you and shut down your web site.You say that x is doing a bad job and he shuts you down.This like a red light cameras with no court that goes off on yellow and goes off right before you hit the stop line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>been accused counts as a strike = easy DOSDo like what you market competition is doing just a accused them and watch how they can't do any work any more then they get shut off.some get's layed off then to get back they just accused them.You make your own art / music and you trun down a deal and they just trun around and accused youYou give a bad review of a moive / game / any other thing and they just accused you and shut down your web site.You say that x is doing a bad job and he shuts you down.This like a red light cameras with no court that goes off on yellow and goes off right before you hit the stop line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226322</id>
	<title>Re:Law vs law?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UN Declaration of Human Rights?  That's funny.  From the <a href="http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/" title="un.org" rel="nofollow">Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a> [un.org]:</p><p>Article 29.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * <b>(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.</b></p><p>I'm sure politicians everywhere could argue that Article 29 Section 2 covers this.  If not, Article 29 Section 3 seems to be able to cover just about anything regarding an individual's rights.</p><p>The "Purposes and Principles" of the United Nations can be found in their charter: <a href="http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml" title="un.org" rel="nofollow">Chapter 1: Purposes and Principles</a> [un.org].  The word "individual" is not found there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UN Declaration of Human Rights ?
That 's funny .
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [ un.org ] : Article 29 .
        * ( 1 ) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible .
        * ( 2 ) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms , everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality , public order and the general welfare in a democratic society .
        * ( 3 ) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.I 'm sure politicians everywhere could argue that Article 29 Section 2 covers this .
If not , Article 29 Section 3 seems to be able to cover just about anything regarding an individual 's rights.The " Purposes and Principles " of the United Nations can be found in their charter : Chapter 1 : Purposes and Principles [ un.org ] .
The word " individual " is not found there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UN Declaration of Human Rights?
That's funny.
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [un.org]:Article 29.
        * (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
        * (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
        * (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.I'm sure politicians everywhere could argue that Article 29 Section 2 covers this.
If not, Article 29 Section 3 seems to be able to cover just about anything regarding an individual's rights.The "Purposes and Principles" of the United Nations can be found in their charter: Chapter 1: Purposes and Principles [un.org].
The word "individual" is not found there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224024</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266760320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you Captain Obvious! You always keep me so well informed! ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you Captain Obvious !
You always keep me so well informed !
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you Captain Obvious!
You always keep me so well informed!
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222932</id>
	<title>This is absurd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>No proposed law should ever be 'secrete'. That this is bad for everyone is the only reason i can think of why they would try to keep it secrete until it is passed.<br>
It will not help anyone, even the organization that would like to see it (RIAA) enforced. But of course all the negative effect will only be used as a reason for more absurd laws.<br>
<br>
As a whole, does anybody really think the DMCA was beneficial to the economy?</htmltext>
<tokenext>No proposed law should ever be 'secrete' .
That this is bad for everyone is the only reason i can think of why they would try to keep it secrete until it is passed .
It will not help anyone , even the organization that would like to see it ( RIAA ) enforced .
But of course all the negative effect will only be used as a reason for more absurd laws .
As a whole , does anybody really think the DMCA was beneficial to the economy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No proposed law should ever be 'secrete'.
That this is bad for everyone is the only reason i can think of why they would try to keep it secrete until it is passed.
It will not help anyone, even the organization that would like to see it (RIAA) enforced.
But of course all the negative effect will only be used as a reason for more absurd laws.
As a whole, does anybody really think the DMCA was beneficial to the economy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227202</id>
	<title>Re:Keep dreaming *AA</title>
	<author>Solandri</author>
	<datestamp>1266834600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The three strikes provision isn't bad per se.  It just needs some balance, some reciprocity.
<br> <br>
Convicted three times of copyright infringement and you're kicked off the Internet.
<br>
Wrongly accuse people of copyright infringement three times and you're banned from ever filing a copyright infringement claim again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The three strikes provision is n't bad per se .
It just needs some balance , some reciprocity .
Convicted three times of copyright infringement and you 're kicked off the Internet .
Wrongly accuse people of copyright infringement three times and you 're banned from ever filing a copyright infringement claim again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The three strikes provision isn't bad per se.
It just needs some balance, some reciprocity.
Convicted three times of copyright infringement and you're kicked off the Internet.
Wrongly accuse people of copyright infringement three times and you're banned from ever filing a copyright infringement claim again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224896</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1266766800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But EU and US together <em>do</em> run the world. Ultimately, there is one measure of that, and it is the ability to make others do their biddings.</p><p>There are two sides to this, and both are covered. On one hand, EU and US are two biggest economies in the world. On the other, NATO countries account for 2/3 of total world military spending.</p><p>The Chinese may not like it, and they are on a long term program for world domination themselves, but they are still far from reaching this goal. This is still Pax Occidentia, sorry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But EU and US together do run the world .
Ultimately , there is one measure of that , and it is the ability to make others do their biddings.There are two sides to this , and both are covered .
On one hand , EU and US are two biggest economies in the world .
On the other , NATO countries account for 2/3 of total world military spending.The Chinese may not like it , and they are on a long term program for world domination themselves , but they are still far from reaching this goal .
This is still Pax Occidentia , sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But EU and US together do run the world.
Ultimately, there is one measure of that, and it is the ability to make others do their biddings.There are two sides to this, and both are covered.
On one hand, EU and US are two biggest economies in the world.
On the other, NATO countries account for 2/3 of total world military spending.The Chinese may not like it, and they are on a long term program for world domination themselves, but they are still far from reaching this goal.
This is still Pax Occidentia, sorry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224096</id>
	<title>freedom</title>
	<author>mcfedr</author>
	<datestamp>1266760800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>interesting isn't it, how governments all up for freedom of speak and information until it starts to undermine their power or god forbid, their income. no one is in government for the people, power corrupts even the best of people, let alone those who manage to be prime minister/president</htmltext>
<tokenext>interesting is n't it , how governments all up for freedom of speak and information until it starts to undermine their power or god forbid , their income .
no one is in government for the people , power corrupts even the best of people , let alone those who manage to be prime minister/president</tokentext>
<sentencetext>interesting isn't it, how governments all up for freedom of speak and information until it starts to undermine their power or god forbid, their income.
no one is in government for the people, power corrupts even the best of people, let alone those who manage to be prime minister/president</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223518</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>leadacid</author>
	<datestamp>1266756600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there any provision in American law that allows the government to sign secret treaties?  I understand that they aren't expressly authorized to give up the authority given them by the people to another government, and that only a madman would think they could place their citizens under the control of a government they didn't elect, and thus that this is logically wrong, but is there even a spurious justification for it?  How can you possibly have justice when your government is negotiating treaties you aren't allowed to see?  How can the machinery of justice function when you can't know the laws?  How can a person know what actions are forbidden, how can a lawyer defend them, how can people know which rights they no longer have, how can the police know who to imprison?  Does any of this make any sense either from the viewpoint of a human being living in a society made for human beings, or from the point of view of a single cog in a machine that can't be understood and can't possibly function?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any provision in American law that allows the government to sign secret treaties ?
I understand that they are n't expressly authorized to give up the authority given them by the people to another government , and that only a madman would think they could place their citizens under the control of a government they did n't elect , and thus that this is logically wrong , but is there even a spurious justification for it ?
How can you possibly have justice when your government is negotiating treaties you are n't allowed to see ?
How can the machinery of justice function when you ca n't know the laws ?
How can a person know what actions are forbidden , how can a lawyer defend them , how can people know which rights they no longer have , how can the police know who to imprison ?
Does any of this make any sense either from the viewpoint of a human being living in a society made for human beings , or from the point of view of a single cog in a machine that ca n't be understood and ca n't possibly function ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there any provision in American law that allows the government to sign secret treaties?
I understand that they aren't expressly authorized to give up the authority given them by the people to another government, and that only a madman would think they could place their citizens under the control of a government they didn't elect, and thus that this is logically wrong, but is there even a spurious justification for it?
How can you possibly have justice when your government is negotiating treaties you aren't allowed to see?
How can the machinery of justice function when you can't know the laws?
How can a person know what actions are forbidden, how can a lawyer defend them, how can people know which rights they no longer have, how can the police know who to imprison?
Does any of this make any sense either from the viewpoint of a human being living in a society made for human beings, or from the point of view of a single cog in a machine that can't be understood and can't possibly function?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.</p></div><p>I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.
<br> <br>
The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.I wish I could attribute the saying , but here is how I 've heard it said : If your law requires a police state to enforce , then your law is a bad law .
The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.
The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>CannonballHead</author>
	<datestamp>1266755220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But it's far less personally dangerous.  Most people are not killed by the *AA nor by DMCA or ACTA.  People ARE killed by terrorists (and war, etc).  Thus it is most definitely a more personally dangerous threat.</p><p>And most people care more immediately about their personal welfare than their freedom, if it comes down to it.... I think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But it 's far less personally dangerous .
Most people are not killed by the * AA nor by DMCA or ACTA .
People ARE killed by terrorists ( and war , etc ) .
Thus it is most definitely a more personally dangerous threat.And most people care more immediately about their personal welfare than their freedom , if it comes down to it.... I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But it's far less personally dangerous.
Most people are not killed by the *AA nor by DMCA or ACTA.
People ARE killed by terrorists (and war, etc).
Thus it is most definitely a more personally dangerous threat.And most people care more immediately about their personal welfare than their freedom, if it comes down to it.... I think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225492</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>the eric conspiracy</author>
	<datestamp>1266770760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason is that China is probably the main target for this. If they don't toe the line they get screwed for not enacting their own laws to enforce this.</p><p>One thing I notice is that it isn't only media companies participating in this process. The biotechs and tech companies are involved. This tells me that countries that are appropriating IP on a large scale basis are a large part of what the target is here, and is probably a good part of the reason national security is being invoked.</p><p>Slashdot readers are of course worried and justifiably that their personal entertainment habits are going to get gored. But think of the scale of piracy in Asia with it's multi-billions of Internet connected folks and huge pressure to counterfeit or appropriate EVERYTHING (including milk!) and I think that you will see where the money REALLY is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason is that China is probably the main target for this .
If they do n't toe the line they get screwed for not enacting their own laws to enforce this.One thing I notice is that it is n't only media companies participating in this process .
The biotechs and tech companies are involved .
This tells me that countries that are appropriating IP on a large scale basis are a large part of what the target is here , and is probably a good part of the reason national security is being invoked.Slashdot readers are of course worried and justifiably that their personal entertainment habits are going to get gored .
But think of the scale of piracy in Asia with it 's multi-billions of Internet connected folks and huge pressure to counterfeit or appropriate EVERYTHING ( including milk !
) and I think that you will see where the money REALLY is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason is that China is probably the main target for this.
If they don't toe the line they get screwed for not enacting their own laws to enforce this.One thing I notice is that it isn't only media companies participating in this process.
The biotechs and tech companies are involved.
This tells me that countries that are appropriating IP on a large scale basis are a large part of what the target is here, and is probably a good part of the reason national security is being invoked.Slashdot readers are of course worried and justifiably that their personal entertainment habits are going to get gored.
But think of the scale of piracy in Asia with it's multi-billions of Internet connected folks and huge pressure to counterfeit or appropriate EVERYTHING (including milk!
) and I think that you will see where the money REALLY is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224602</id>
	<title>Re:Canadian solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266764220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you have a right to see it that way.  Just understand that the US government isn't really in the hands of most americans.  it's in the hands of a relatively small but very wealthy and connected group consisting of corporations and social movements (extreme idealists).  the average american can't do shit about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you have a right to see it that way .
Just understand that the US government is n't really in the hands of most americans .
it 's in the hands of a relatively small but very wealthy and connected group consisting of corporations and social movements ( extreme idealists ) .
the average american ca n't do shit about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you have a right to see it that way.
Just understand that the US government isn't really in the hands of most americans.
it's in the hands of a relatively small but very wealthy and connected group consisting of corporations and social movements (extreme idealists).
the average american can't do shit about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266755520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the Chinese don't think Europe and the Anglo-Americans run the world.  Seriously, whenever you hear the word "global" or "international" that really means Europe (Specifically the EU leaders), the Anglo Countries (spearheaded by British and American think tanks), any third world countries they can bribe or intimidate into going along with them and NOT China or Russia (and occasionally Brazil and India will opt out too).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the Chinese do n't think Europe and the Anglo-Americans run the world .
Seriously , whenever you hear the word " global " or " international " that really means Europe ( Specifically the EU leaders ) , the Anglo Countries ( spearheaded by British and American think tanks ) , any third world countries they can bribe or intimidate into going along with them and NOT China or Russia ( and occasionally Brazil and India will opt out too ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the Chinese don't think Europe and the Anglo-Americans run the world.
Seriously, whenever you hear the word "global" or "international" that really means Europe (Specifically the EU leaders), the Anglo Countries (spearheaded by British and American think tanks), any third world countries they can bribe or intimidate into going along with them and NOT China or Russia (and occasionally Brazil and India will opt out too).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224474</id>
	<title>Who leaked?</title>
	<author>fyoder</author>
	<datestamp>1266763260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone has uploaded a PDF to a Google Group that is claimed to be the proposal for Internet copyright enforcement that the USA has put forward for ACTA, the secret copyright treaty whose seventh round of negotiations just concluded in Guadalajara, Mexico.</p></div><p>I wonder who that someone is who leaked it.  It could be part of a strategy to scare the crap out of people so that when they come out with something no more than an international DMCA people will breath a sigh of relief instead of getting all up in arms.  What they've leaked is so bad as to almost seem not credible.</p><p>From the <a href="http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/leaked-acta-draft-treaty-reveals-plans-for-internet-clampdown" title="computerworld.co.nz">computerworld.co.nz article:</a> [computerworld.co.nz]</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The chapter on the internet from the draft treaty was shown to the IDG News Service by a source close to people directly involved in the talks, who asked to remain anonymous. Although it was drawn up last October, it is the most recent negotiating text available, according to the source.</p></div><p>So is this a real leak, or something they want disseminated?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/paranoia</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : Someone has uploaded a PDF to a Google Group that is claimed to be the proposal for Internet copyright enforcement that the USA has put forward for ACTA , the secret copyright treaty whose seventh round of negotiations just concluded in Guadalajara , Mexico.I wonder who that someone is who leaked it .
It could be part of a strategy to scare the crap out of people so that when they come out with something no more than an international DMCA people will breath a sigh of relief instead of getting all up in arms .
What they 've leaked is so bad as to almost seem not credible.From the computerworld.co.nz article : [ computerworld.co.nz ] The chapter on the internet from the draft treaty was shown to the IDG News Service by a source close to people directly involved in the talks , who asked to remain anonymous .
Although it was drawn up last October , it is the most recent negotiating text available , according to the source.So is this a real leak , or something they want disseminated ?
/paranoia</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:Someone has uploaded a PDF to a Google Group that is claimed to be the proposal for Internet copyright enforcement that the USA has put forward for ACTA, the secret copyright treaty whose seventh round of negotiations just concluded in Guadalajara, Mexico.I wonder who that someone is who leaked it.
It could be part of a strategy to scare the crap out of people so that when they come out with something no more than an international DMCA people will breath a sigh of relief instead of getting all up in arms.
What they've leaked is so bad as to almost seem not credible.From the computerworld.co.nz article: [computerworld.co.nz]The chapter on the internet from the draft treaty was shown to the IDG News Service by a source close to people directly involved in the talks, who asked to remain anonymous.
Although it was drawn up last October, it is the most recent negotiating text available, according to the source.So is this a real leak, or something they want disseminated?
/paranoia
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223084</id>
	<title>When governments cease to represent their citizens</title>
	<author>Adrian Lopez</author>
	<datestamp>1266753960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm reminded of the beautiful phrase: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..." Too bad this sort of response is no longer a realistic alternative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm reminded of the beautiful phrase : " When in the Course of human events , it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ... " Too bad this sort of response is no longer a realistic alternative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm reminded of the beautiful phrase: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ..." Too bad this sort of response is no longer a realistic alternative.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222952</id>
	<title>Surprised?</title>
	<author>Renraku</author>
	<datestamp>1266753180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone really surprised by this?  I know I'm not.  I was actually hoping they'd implement the death penalty or at least life in prison for sharing MP3s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone really surprised by this ?
I know I 'm not .
I was actually hoping they 'd implement the death penalty or at least life in prison for sharing MP3s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone really surprised by this?
I know I'm not.
I was actually hoping they'd implement the death penalty or at least life in prison for sharing MP3s.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223208</id>
	<title>Doesn't matter</title>
	<author>einhverfr</author>
	<datestamp>1266754680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact is that each of us probably commits three felonies a day as it is, or so says Harvey Silverglate of the EFF, ACLU, and FIRE (see his book "Three Felonies a Day.")  Heck, it's probably a felony (under wire fraud statutes) to surf Slashdot while you are at work.  And given that it's a felony there, it's probably also a felony under the CFAA.  So if you surf Slashdot at work, you are already two thirds of the way there.....</p><p>The fact is it doesn't matter if you have done anything wrong.  The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight (try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen).</p><p>I am of the opinion that the Constitution is in shambles anyway.  I oppose this treaty but I am too cynical to think that will make a difference.  Prosecutors can ALREADY go after anybody they want to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact is that each of us probably commits three felonies a day as it is , or so says Harvey Silverglate of the EFF , ACLU , and FIRE ( see his book " Three Felonies a Day .
" ) Heck , it 's probably a felony ( under wire fraud statutes ) to surf Slashdot while you are at work .
And given that it 's a felony there , it 's probably also a felony under the CFAA .
So if you surf Slashdot at work , you are already two thirds of the way there.....The fact is it does n't matter if you have done anything wrong .
The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight ( try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen ) .I am of the opinion that the Constitution is in shambles anyway .
I oppose this treaty but I am too cynical to think that will make a difference .
Prosecutors can ALREADY go after anybody they want to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact is that each of us probably commits three felonies a day as it is, or so says Harvey Silverglate of the EFF, ACLU, and FIRE (see his book "Three Felonies a Day.
")  Heck, it's probably a felony (under wire fraud statutes) to surf Slashdot while you are at work.
And given that it's a felony there, it's probably also a felony under the CFAA.
So if you surf Slashdot at work, you are already two thirds of the way there.....The fact is it doesn't matter if you have done anything wrong.
The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight (try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen).I am of the opinion that the Constitution is in shambles anyway.
I oppose this treaty but I am too cynical to think that will make a difference.
Prosecutors can ALREADY go after anybody they want to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227468</id>
	<title>NAZI-ism under the microscope.</title>
	<author>dogzdik</author>
	<datestamp>1266838140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ohhhhh you mean I can only buy that ONE CD and not rip it and copy it to my PC and then move the files to my MP3 player - because I will be spied upon; every time I update my MP3 player and PC?

<p> - </p><p>
Ummmmmmmmmm how does go fuck yourself sound? - In the form of only buying the material of unsigned artists, and creating my own music.
</p><p> - </p><p>

<a href="http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/local/news/general/music-fee-hike-backfires/1646165.aspx?storypage=0" title="bendigoadvertiser.com.au" rel="nofollow">http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/local/news/general/music-fee-hike-backfires/1646165.aspx?storypage=0</a> [bendigoadvertiser.com.au]
</p><p> - </p><p>

Music fee hike backfires
12 Oct, 2009 09:08 AM
</p><p> - </p><p>
A PUSH by Australian record companies to make clubs, hotels, restaurants and cafes pay tens of millions of dollars more in fees to play their music has backfired.
</p><p> - </p><p>
Businesses have decided to turn off tunes licensed by the record companies and play the music of artists that are not signed to major labels.
</p><p> - </p><p>
The scheme would have increased some license fees from around $500 to almost $36,000.
</p><p> - </p><p>
A Clubs Australia spokesman was unable to say how many central Victorian businesses would have been slugged with the drastic cost hike.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;We&rsquo;re talking about every restaurant, cafe and club being affected,&rdquo; the spokesman said yesterday.
</p><p> - </p><p>
The fee changes would have resulted in businesses such as the Bendigo Club, which staff said yesterday had a bistro capacity of about 50, paying $3075.80 instead of the usual $62.04.
</p><p> - </p><p>
Bendigo District RSL staff said their bistro had a capacity of about 120, which would have increased fees by about $8500.
</p><p> - </p><p>
Clubs Australia announced at its annual general meeting a new scheme that would allow clubs to bypass the license fee charged by record companies.
</p><p> - </p><p>
Clubs Australia will set up a program to source and distribute the music of artists not signed to major record labels and who are consequently exempt from the restaurant tariff.
</p><p> - </p><p>
As part of the new scheme, local musicians will be given the opportunity to sell their music in clubs, while money earned from the sale of background music CDs will be used to establish a fund for talented Australian musicians.
</p><p> - </p><p>
From December 1, the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia will increase the tariff required every year by all clubs, hotels, restaurants and cafes wanting to play background music.
</p><p> - </p><p>
Clubs Australia chief executive officer David Costello said the PPCA was an organisation whose board members included senior executives at EMI Music, Warner Music, Sony Music Entertainment and Universal Music.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;It&rsquo;s well known that record labels have suffered a decline in CD sales due to illegal downloads. If this is about countering falling revenue for the big music companies, then they should be addressing music piracy,&rdquo; Mr Costello said.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;Expecting the club and restaurant industry to make up for lower CD sales is not only unfair but as we have seen today, certain to fail.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;Two years ago the PPCA increased the fee for recorded music in nightclubs by 1400 per cent as well as announcing it is increasing the fee for music played in gyms by 5000 per cent.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;The music labels are working their way through the dozens of music tariffs paid by small businesses.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;It seems only a matter of time before the PPCA increases fees for music on hold, jukeboxes, conference and pool rooms, squash courts and even swimming pools.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;Clubs are today drawing a line in the sand and will no longer use music licensed by the big Australian record labels that requires they pay an annual fee to the PPCA.&rdquo;
</p><p> - </p><p>
A PPCA spokeswoman said Clubs Australia was &ldquo;perfectly entitled&rdquo; to go in another direction.
</p><p> - </p><p>
&ldquo;The rates give artists and labels a fair and reasonable deal and were the subject of extensive consultation with the industry,&rdquo; she said.
</p><p> - </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ohhhhh you mean I can only buy that ONE CD and not rip it and copy it to my PC and then move the files to my MP3 player - because I will be spied upon ; every time I update my MP3 player and PC ?
- Ummmmmmmmmm how does go fuck yourself sound ?
- In the form of only buying the material of unsigned artists , and creating my own music .
- http : //www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/local/news/general/music-fee-hike-backfires/1646165.aspx ? storypage = 0 [ bendigoadvertiser.com.au ] - Music fee hike backfires 12 Oct , 2009 09 : 08 AM - A PUSH by Australian record companies to make clubs , hotels , restaurants and cafes pay tens of millions of dollars more in fees to play their music has backfired .
- Businesses have decided to turn off tunes licensed by the record companies and play the music of artists that are not signed to major labels .
- The scheme would have increased some license fees from around $ 500 to almost $ 36,000 .
- A Clubs Australia spokesman was unable to say how many central Victorian businesses would have been slugged with the drastic cost hike .
-    We    re talking about every restaurant , cafe and club being affected ,    the spokesman said yesterday .
- The fee changes would have resulted in businesses such as the Bendigo Club , which staff said yesterday had a bistro capacity of about 50 , paying $ 3075.80 instead of the usual $ 62.04 .
- Bendigo District RSL staff said their bistro had a capacity of about 120 , which would have increased fees by about $ 8500 .
- Clubs Australia announced at its annual general meeting a new scheme that would allow clubs to bypass the license fee charged by record companies .
- Clubs Australia will set up a program to source and distribute the music of artists not signed to major record labels and who are consequently exempt from the restaurant tariff .
- As part of the new scheme , local musicians will be given the opportunity to sell their music in clubs , while money earned from the sale of background music CDs will be used to establish a fund for talented Australian musicians .
- From December 1 , the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia will increase the tariff required every year by all clubs , hotels , restaurants and cafes wanting to play background music .
- Clubs Australia chief executive officer David Costello said the PPCA was an organisation whose board members included senior executives at EMI Music , Warner Music , Sony Music Entertainment and Universal Music .
-    It    s well known that record labels have suffered a decline in CD sales due to illegal downloads .
If this is about countering falling revenue for the big music companies , then they should be addressing music piracy ,    Mr Costello said .
-    Expecting the club and restaurant industry to make up for lower CD sales is not only unfair but as we have seen today , certain to fail .
-    Two years ago the PPCA increased the fee for recorded music in nightclubs by 1400 per cent as well as announcing it is increasing the fee for music played in gyms by 5000 per cent .
-    The music labels are working their way through the dozens of music tariffs paid by small businesses .
-    It seems only a matter of time before the PPCA increases fees for music on hold , jukeboxes , conference and pool rooms , squash courts and even swimming pools .
-    Clubs are today drawing a line in the sand and will no longer use music licensed by the big Australian record labels that requires they pay an annual fee to the PPCA.    - A PPCA spokeswoman said Clubs Australia was    perfectly entitled    to go in another direction .
-    The rates give artists and labels a fair and reasonable deal and were the subject of extensive consultation with the industry ,    she said .
-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ohhhhh you mean I can only buy that ONE CD and not rip it and copy it to my PC and then move the files to my MP3 player - because I will be spied upon; every time I update my MP3 player and PC?
- 
Ummmmmmmmmm how does go fuck yourself sound?
- In the form of only buying the material of unsigned artists, and creating my own music.
- 

http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/local/news/general/music-fee-hike-backfires/1646165.aspx?storypage=0 [bendigoadvertiser.com.au]
 - 

Music fee hike backfires
12 Oct, 2009 09:08 AM
 - 
A PUSH by Australian record companies to make clubs, hotels, restaurants and cafes pay tens of millions of dollars more in fees to play their music has backfired.
- 
Businesses have decided to turn off tunes licensed by the record companies and play the music of artists that are not signed to major labels.
- 
The scheme would have increased some license fees from around $500 to almost $36,000.
- 
A Clubs Australia spokesman was unable to say how many central Victorian businesses would have been slugged with the drastic cost hike.
- 
“We’re talking about every restaurant, cafe and club being affected,” the spokesman said yesterday.
- 
The fee changes would have resulted in businesses such as the Bendigo Club, which staff said yesterday had a bistro capacity of about 50, paying $3075.80 instead of the usual $62.04.
- 
Bendigo District RSL staff said their bistro had a capacity of about 120, which would have increased fees by about $8500.
- 
Clubs Australia announced at its annual general meeting a new scheme that would allow clubs to bypass the license fee charged by record companies.
- 
Clubs Australia will set up a program to source and distribute the music of artists not signed to major record labels and who are consequently exempt from the restaurant tariff.
- 
As part of the new scheme, local musicians will be given the opportunity to sell their music in clubs, while money earned from the sale of background music CDs will be used to establish a fund for talented Australian musicians.
- 
From December 1, the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia will increase the tariff required every year by all clubs, hotels, restaurants and cafes wanting to play background music.
- 
Clubs Australia chief executive officer David Costello said the PPCA was an organisation whose board members included senior executives at EMI Music, Warner Music, Sony Music Entertainment and Universal Music.
- 
“It’s well known that record labels have suffered a decline in CD sales due to illegal downloads.
If this is about countering falling revenue for the big music companies, then they should be addressing music piracy,” Mr Costello said.
- 
“Expecting the club and restaurant industry to make up for lower CD sales is not only unfair but as we have seen today, certain to fail.
- 
“Two years ago the PPCA increased the fee for recorded music in nightclubs by 1400 per cent as well as announcing it is increasing the fee for music played in gyms by 5000 per cent.
- 
“The music labels are working their way through the dozens of music tariffs paid by small businesses.
- 
“It seems only a matter of time before the PPCA increases fees for music on hold, jukeboxes, conference and pool rooms, squash courts and even swimming pools.
- 
“Clubs are today drawing a line in the sand and will no longer use music licensed by the big Australian record labels that requires they pay an annual fee to the PPCA.”
 - 
A PPCA spokeswoman said Clubs Australia was “perfectly entitled” to go in another direction.
- 
“The rates give artists and labels a fair and reasonable deal and were the subject of extensive consultation with the industry,” she said.
- </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224120</id>
	<title>Re:Keep dreaming *AA</title>
	<author>value\_added</author>
	<datestamp>1266760980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Lofty goals. This isn't enforceable, legally or practically. Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet? How? </i></p><p>You underestimate the power of the courts, and the effectiveness of bureauracies.  Ever been the subject of a court order, or known someone who has?  You'd be surprised at how a simple and seemingly narrow thing can have wide ranging implications.  A small claims judgment, court-order child support, or a DUI can bring a lot of third-parties into the mix.</p><p>For hypothetical "DMCA Plus" offenses, things could remain simple.  A signed order that requires the guilty party to "not use a computer or the internet" would suffice.  Pissing off a judge by disregarding his or her order could easily result in, at minimum, increasingly harsh fines or penalties.  And losing service from your ISP?  Well, how many do you really have to choose from in your area?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lofty goals .
This is n't enforceable , legally or practically .
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet ?
How ? You underestimate the power of the courts , and the effectiveness of bureauracies .
Ever been the subject of a court order , or known someone who has ?
You 'd be surprised at how a simple and seemingly narrow thing can have wide ranging implications .
A small claims judgment , court-order child support , or a DUI can bring a lot of third-parties into the mix.For hypothetical " DMCA Plus " offenses , things could remain simple .
A signed order that requires the guilty party to " not use a computer or the internet " would suffice .
Pissing off a judge by disregarding his or her order could easily result in , at minimum , increasingly harsh fines or penalties .
And losing service from your ISP ?
Well , how many do you really have to choose from in your area ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lofty goals.
This isn't enforceable, legally or practically.
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet?
How? You underestimate the power of the courts, and the effectiveness of bureauracies.
Ever been the subject of a court order, or known someone who has?
You'd be surprised at how a simple and seemingly narrow thing can have wide ranging implications.
A small claims judgment, court-order child support, or a DUI can bring a lot of third-parties into the mix.For hypothetical "DMCA Plus" offenses, things could remain simple.
A signed order that requires the guilty party to "not use a computer or the internet" would suffice.
Pissing off a judge by disregarding his or her order could easily result in, at minimum, increasingly harsh fines or penalties.
And losing service from your ISP?
Well, how many do you really have to choose from in your area?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233222</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>sorak</author>
	<datestamp>1266868620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>people are more worried about drama.</p><p>If you look up the statistics on how many people are killed every year by cigarettes, reckless driving, firearms, lack of health insurance, or obesity, and then compare that to how many people have been killed in the past decade by terrorism, you would find that terrorism is a more dramatic threat, but not a more dangerous one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>people are more worried about drama.If you look up the statistics on how many people are killed every year by cigarettes , reckless driving , firearms , lack of health insurance , or obesity , and then compare that to how many people have been killed in the past decade by terrorism , you would find that terrorism is a more dramatic threat , but not a more dangerous one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>people are more worried about drama.If you look up the statistics on how many people are killed every year by cigarettes, reckless driving, firearms, lack of health insurance, or obesity, and then compare that to how many people have been killed in the past decade by terrorism, you would find that terrorism is a more dramatic threat, but not a more dangerous one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229636</id>
	<title>Re:Three what?</title>
	<author>KlaymenDK</author>
	<datestamp>1266856200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Besides, if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world, you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport!</p><p>(thats the one with the round ball by the way)</p></div><p>See, there's your problem. Haven't you been paying attention to the recent "document format war" discussions? It's better to use one specific format, however obscure it may be, than something else that can be god-knows-what depending on regional settings.</p><p>That is, you ought to stick with the baseball analogy.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...I can't believe we're joking about this unfathomably creepy issue. I guess we know we're doomed already anyway?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world , you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport !
( thats the one with the round ball by the way ) See , there 's your problem .
Have n't you been paying attention to the recent " document format war " discussions ?
It 's better to use one specific format , however obscure it may be , than something else that can be god-knows-what depending on regional settings.That is , you ought to stick with the baseball analogy .
...I ca n't believe we 're joking about this unfathomably creepy issue .
I guess we know we 're doomed already anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world, you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport!
(thats the one with the round ball by the way)See, there's your problem.
Haven't you been paying attention to the recent "document format war" discussions?
It's better to use one specific format, however obscure it may be, than something else that can be god-knows-what depending on regional settings.That is, you ought to stick with the baseball analogy.
...I can't believe we're joking about this unfathomably creepy issue.
I guess we know we're doomed already anyway?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223242</id>
	<title>Who buys stuff anymore?</title>
	<author>kyrcant</author>
	<datestamp>1266754860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bought one CD last month, They Might Be Giants Science album, and that was the first one in over a decade.  Likewise, I have almost no DVD movies.  They're making themselves irrelevant even quicker than necessary.  I'm all about Hulu, Pandora and Netflix.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought one CD last month , They Might Be Giants Science album , and that was the first one in over a decade .
Likewise , I have almost no DVD movies .
They 're making themselves irrelevant even quicker than necessary .
I 'm all about Hulu , Pandora and Netflix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought one CD last month, They Might Be Giants Science album, and that was the first one in over a decade.
Likewise, I have almost no DVD movies.
They're making themselves irrelevant even quicker than necessary.
I'm all about Hulu, Pandora and Netflix.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222968</id>
	<title>DMCA, international edition</title>
	<author>redlegion</author>
	<datestamp>1266753300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wunderbar. Perhaps instead of a death penalty we should castrate or cut off clitorises as a punishment for copyright infringement. It's just as barbaric, or perhaps even more barbaric, than ridiculous awards for copyright infringement cases.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wunderbar .
Perhaps instead of a death penalty we should castrate or cut off clitorises as a punishment for copyright infringement .
It 's just as barbaric , or perhaps even more barbaric , than ridiculous awards for copyright infringement cases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wunderbar.
Perhaps instead of a death penalty we should castrate or cut off clitorises as a punishment for copyright infringement.
It's just as barbaric, or perhaps even more barbaric, than ridiculous awards for copyright infringement cases.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225202</id>
	<title>ACTA is good</title>
	<author>Lomegor</author>
	<datestamp>1266768660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's just face it. If ACTA do comes out, it will improve innovation between pirates. Which is good. For us. Bad, for them.<br>
As everyone says with every new DRM that comes out, this will end in more people being pirates and in making it easier to be one. It is, in some twisted and crazy way, the downfall of intellectual property; the government will not be able to force it, and the pirates will be able to create better and more distributed ways to improve the current technology. Web pages will not fall, because they will be hosted in a distributed form, with no real server to shut down; people will have more ways to be anonymized; Tor will prevail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's just face it .
If ACTA do comes out , it will improve innovation between pirates .
Which is good .
For us .
Bad , for them .
As everyone says with every new DRM that comes out , this will end in more people being pirates and in making it easier to be one .
It is , in some twisted and crazy way , the downfall of intellectual property ; the government will not be able to force it , and the pirates will be able to create better and more distributed ways to improve the current technology .
Web pages will not fall , because they will be hosted in a distributed form , with no real server to shut down ; people will have more ways to be anonymized ; Tor will prevail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's just face it.
If ACTA do comes out, it will improve innovation between pirates.
Which is good.
For us.
Bad, for them.
As everyone says with every new DRM that comes out, this will end in more people being pirates and in making it easier to be one.
It is, in some twisted and crazy way, the downfall of intellectual property; the government will not be able to force it, and the pirates will be able to create better and more distributed ways to improve the current technology.
Web pages will not fall, because they will be hosted in a distributed form, with no real server to shut down; people will have more ways to be anonymized; Tor will prevail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31228130</id>
	<title>Canadian petition against ACTA.</title>
	<author>Russell McOrmond</author>
	<datestamp>1266845700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just wanted people to know that we have drafted a petition against ACTA.  Politicians have no clue what is going on, and this is one tool among many to make it show up on the agenda.</p><p><a href="http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/acta/" title="digital-copyright.ca" rel="nofollow">http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/acta/</a> [digital-copyright.ca]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just wanted people to know that we have drafted a petition against ACTA .
Politicians have no clue what is going on , and this is one tool among many to make it show up on the agenda.http : //www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/acta/ [ digital-copyright.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just wanted people to know that we have drafted a petition against ACTA.
Politicians have no clue what is going on, and this is one tool among many to make it show up on the agenda.http://www.digital-copyright.ca/petition/acta/ [digital-copyright.ca]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223222</id>
	<title>Verizon will have to be shut down.</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1266754740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why dont we really curb piracy and close the internet all together.</p><p>If this bullshit becomes a reality, it will destroy our economy and technological progress. Think about it.... think really hard about that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why dont we really curb piracy and close the internet all together.If this bullshit becomes a reality , it will destroy our economy and technological progress .
Think about it.... think really hard about that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why dont we really curb piracy and close the internet all together.If this bullshit becomes a reality, it will destroy our economy and technological progress.
Think about it.... think really hard about that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224012</id>
	<title>the FSF argument:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266760260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From wikipedia:</p><p>"The FSF also argues that ACTA will make it harder for users of free operating systems to play non-free media because DRM protected media would not be legally playable with free software."</p><p>I suspect that's at least part of the point.  MS will love it; media will be only playable on "trusted" and "approved" Genuine Windows Software.  Only pirates and terrorists use free operating systems, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From wikipedia : " The FSF also argues that ACTA will make it harder for users of free operating systems to play non-free media because DRM protected media would not be legally playable with free software .
" I suspect that 's at least part of the point .
MS will love it ; media will be only playable on " trusted " and " approved " Genuine Windows Software .
Only pirates and terrorists use free operating systems , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From wikipedia:"The FSF also argues that ACTA will make it harder for users of free operating systems to play non-free media because DRM protected media would not be legally playable with free software.
"I suspect that's at least part of the point.
MS will love it; media will be only playable on "trusted" and "approved" Genuine Windows Software.
Only pirates and terrorists use free operating systems, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224264</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266761820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My freedom is my only personal welfare so fuck them!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My freedom is my only personal welfare so fuck them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My freedom is my only personal welfare so fuck them!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31230598</id>
	<title>Re:Crypto</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266860760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If encryption becomes widespread and hampers montoring of traffic it will be made illegal.  It's a bizzare fantasy to think that anything else would happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If encryption becomes widespread and hampers montoring of traffic it will be made illegal .
It 's a bizzare fantasy to think that anything else would happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If encryption becomes widespread and hampers montoring of traffic it will be made illegal.
It's a bizzare fantasy to think that anything else would happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Larryish</author>
	<datestamp>1266759540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this looks like it will actually come to pass, stock up on ChiPods. As many as you can buy, buy them. When new hardware \_requires\_ DRM and locked-down transfer channels, those things will be golden.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this looks like it will actually come to pass , stock up on ChiPods .
As many as you can buy , buy them .
When new hardware \ _requires \ _ DRM and locked-down transfer channels , those things will be golden .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this looks like it will actually come to pass, stock up on ChiPods.
As many as you can buy, buy them.
When new hardware \_requires\_ DRM and locked-down transfer channels, those things will be golden.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824</id>
	<title>The Furture</title>
	<author>BountyX</author>
	<datestamp>1266758880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>*some time in the near furture*
<br> <br>
Due to ACTA, everyone now listens to CC music, watches youtube, and uses only GPL software. Copyright is considered a very large liability by companies and people. All of Microsoft's servers have been shut down due to ACTA accusations made by GPL developers. Microsoft uses thepiratebay (which is still online) to distribute copies of the new Windows 10. These copies are infected with a malicious software that downloads bootleg Disney movies and reports the end-user to Disney for affliate revenue. The malicious software developer also sues the end-user directly for copyright infridgment. Meanwhile, the RIAA and MPAA are the single source of all remaining pirated musics and movies since they need pirates to survive. They eventually all go to jail for downloading illegal copies of "The Little Mermaid". NewYorkCountryLawyer is now in the Supreme Court trying to overturn ACTA; however, the Supreme Court judges have been replaced by drones provided by the airfoce. NewYorkCountryLawyer uses a legal loop-hole in the constition that allows a EULA to trump every US law ever made. Guns are no longer needed, becuase you can just throw a EULA into someones face demanding they kill themselves. The world finally achieves universal peace.</htmltext>
<tokenext>* some time in the near furture * Due to ACTA , everyone now listens to CC music , watches youtube , and uses only GPL software .
Copyright is considered a very large liability by companies and people .
All of Microsoft 's servers have been shut down due to ACTA accusations made by GPL developers .
Microsoft uses thepiratebay ( which is still online ) to distribute copies of the new Windows 10 .
These copies are infected with a malicious software that downloads bootleg Disney movies and reports the end-user to Disney for affliate revenue .
The malicious software developer also sues the end-user directly for copyright infridgment .
Meanwhile , the RIAA and MPAA are the single source of all remaining pirated musics and movies since they need pirates to survive .
They eventually all go to jail for downloading illegal copies of " The Little Mermaid " .
NewYorkCountryLawyer is now in the Supreme Court trying to overturn ACTA ; however , the Supreme Court judges have been replaced by drones provided by the airfoce .
NewYorkCountryLawyer uses a legal loop-hole in the constition that allows a EULA to trump every US law ever made .
Guns are no longer needed , becuase you can just throw a EULA into someones face demanding they kill themselves .
The world finally achieves universal peace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*some time in the near furture*
 
Due to ACTA, everyone now listens to CC music, watches youtube, and uses only GPL software.
Copyright is considered a very large liability by companies and people.
All of Microsoft's servers have been shut down due to ACTA accusations made by GPL developers.
Microsoft uses thepiratebay (which is still online) to distribute copies of the new Windows 10.
These copies are infected with a malicious software that downloads bootleg Disney movies and reports the end-user to Disney for affliate revenue.
The malicious software developer also sues the end-user directly for copyright infridgment.
Meanwhile, the RIAA and MPAA are the single source of all remaining pirated musics and movies since they need pirates to survive.
They eventually all go to jail for downloading illegal copies of "The Little Mermaid".
NewYorkCountryLawyer is now in the Supreme Court trying to overturn ACTA; however, the Supreme Court judges have been replaced by drones provided by the airfoce.
NewYorkCountryLawyer uses a legal loop-hole in the constition that allows a EULA to trump every US law ever made.
Guns are no longer needed, becuase you can just throw a EULA into someones face demanding they kill themselves.
The world finally achieves universal peace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225858</id>
	<title>paranoid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266773820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think everyone is just paranoid, all scared that big brother is going to come and get the internet<br>Lets think about this logically,</p><p>First, lets all keep in mind that we are a capitalist country, ISP's have always been resisted throwing people off the internet(id say lip service), Its money for them; its also bad PR (where they already have a problem) I remember comcast just lowering bandwidth and it screwed them, imagine thousands of people getting cut off, many not even guilty. BAD BAD PR, I don't believe they will go along with this, and if they do, except to see services that work around it.</p><p>As far as law goes; Treaties do not supersede the constitution,<br>http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/staterights/treaties.htm (opinions of supreme courts)</p><p>So to really get this through they would need a law, that the courts will probably toss down (free speech and all), free market wont embrace it; and once again, the AA's of the market will look stupider then they did before.</p><p>I only speak for USA, i dont know about other country's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think everyone is just paranoid , all scared that big brother is going to come and get the internetLets think about this logically,First , lets all keep in mind that we are a capitalist country , ISP 's have always been resisted throwing people off the internet ( id say lip service ) , Its money for them ; its also bad PR ( where they already have a problem ) I remember comcast just lowering bandwidth and it screwed them , imagine thousands of people getting cut off , many not even guilty .
BAD BAD PR , I do n't believe they will go along with this , and if they do , except to see services that work around it.As far as law goes ; Treaties do not supersede the constitution,http : //www.sweetliberty.org/issues/staterights/treaties.htm ( opinions of supreme courts ) So to really get this through they would need a law , that the courts will probably toss down ( free speech and all ) , free market wont embrace it ; and once again , the AA 's of the market will look stupider then they did before.I only speak for USA , i dont know about other country 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think everyone is just paranoid, all scared that big brother is going to come and get the internetLets think about this logically,First, lets all keep in mind that we are a capitalist country, ISP's have always been resisted throwing people off the internet(id say lip service), Its money for them; its also bad PR (where they already have a problem) I remember comcast just lowering bandwidth and it screwed them, imagine thousands of people getting cut off, many not even guilty.
BAD BAD PR, I don't believe they will go along with this, and if they do, except to see services that work around it.As far as law goes; Treaties do not supersede the constitution,http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/staterights/treaties.htm (opinions of supreme courts)So to really get this through they would need a law, that the courts will probably toss down (free speech and all), free market wont embrace it; and once again, the AA's of the market will look stupider then they did before.I only speak for USA, i dont know about other country's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223592</id>
	<title>Shadow Run becoming a reality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266757140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I may not have to play Shadow Run with pen and paper any more...it'll just be reality.  Without the elves and Orcs of course...and the magic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I may not have to play Shadow Run with pen and paper any more...it 'll just be reality .
Without the elves and Orcs of course...and the magic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I may not have to play Shadow Run with pen and paper any more...it'll just be reality.
Without the elves and Orcs of course...and the magic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224254</id>
	<title>Let's get the phone company in trouble</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266761760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If any of this nonsense gets into law, what happens if you sing "Happy Birthday" over the phone, or some other copyrighted work?  Three times and you get your phone cut off, and the phone company will be in trouble for facilitating infringement?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If any of this nonsense gets into law , what happens if you sing " Happy Birthday " over the phone , or some other copyrighted work ?
Three times and you get your phone cut off , and the phone company will be in trouble for facilitating infringement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If any of this nonsense gets into law, what happens if you sing "Happy Birthday" over the phone, or some other copyrighted work?
Three times and you get your phone cut off, and the phone company will be in trouble for facilitating infringement?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224778</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266765660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.</p></div><p>Related saying?</p><p>A policeman's job is only easy in a police state.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -- Touch of Evil, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052311/quotes</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish I could attribute the saying , but here is how I 've heard it said : If your law requires a police state to enforce , then your law is a bad law.Related saying ? A policeman 's job is only easy in a police state .
        -- Touch of Evil , http : //www.imdb.com/title/tt0052311/quotes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.Related saying?A policeman's job is only easy in a police state.
        -- Touch of Evil, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052311/quotes
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223488</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Wowsers</author>
	<datestamp>1266756420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a difference between this ACTA treaty and terrorism? They both aim to control and / or destroy economic activity, and keep control of it in the hands of the few.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a difference between this ACTA treaty and terrorism ?
They both aim to control and / or destroy economic activity , and keep control of it in the hands of the few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a difference between this ACTA treaty and terrorism?
They both aim to control and / or destroy economic activity, and keep control of it in the hands of the few.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229736</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>ElectricTurtle</author>
	<datestamp>1266856620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a feeling that you're one of those liberals who gets their jollies by pretending to be a crazy conservative to defame conservatives and perpetuate the stereotype that they're insane and irrational. However, I'm going to feed the troll.<br> <br>
If you want to start a political movement that proceeds from ballot box to ammo box, I can respect that, so long as you walk in the founders' footsteps, taking responsibility, petitioning first, working in public and doing whatever possible to engender the support of the public, and if all else fails, attacking military targets. On the face of it though, you advocate your own tyranny. Forcing the defenseless to your personal political whims on threat of death is wholly dishonorable. That makes you a tyrant, no better than any other dictator rightly despised by history. And I tell you this, though you would go to a government office and demand at gunpoint everything that I myself ever dreamed a government should do or be, were I there and armed (and I am almost all the time) I would cut you down immediately, for that very reason. Sic semper tyrannis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a feeling that you 're one of those liberals who gets their jollies by pretending to be a crazy conservative to defame conservatives and perpetuate the stereotype that they 're insane and irrational .
However , I 'm going to feed the troll .
If you want to start a political movement that proceeds from ballot box to ammo box , I can respect that , so long as you walk in the founders ' footsteps , taking responsibility , petitioning first , working in public and doing whatever possible to engender the support of the public , and if all else fails , attacking military targets .
On the face of it though , you advocate your own tyranny .
Forcing the defenseless to your personal political whims on threat of death is wholly dishonorable .
That makes you a tyrant , no better than any other dictator rightly despised by history .
And I tell you this , though you would go to a government office and demand at gunpoint everything that I myself ever dreamed a government should do or be , were I there and armed ( and I am almost all the time ) I would cut you down immediately , for that very reason .
Sic semper tyrannis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a feeling that you're one of those liberals who gets their jollies by pretending to be a crazy conservative to defame conservatives and perpetuate the stereotype that they're insane and irrational.
However, I'm going to feed the troll.
If you want to start a political movement that proceeds from ballot box to ammo box, I can respect that, so long as you walk in the founders' footsteps, taking responsibility, petitioning first, working in public and doing whatever possible to engender the support of the public, and if all else fails, attacking military targets.
On the face of it though, you advocate your own tyranny.
Forcing the defenseless to your personal political whims on threat of death is wholly dishonorable.
That makes you a tyrant, no better than any other dictator rightly despised by history.
And I tell you this, though you would go to a government office and demand at gunpoint everything that I myself ever dreamed a government should do or be, were I there and armed (and I am almost all the time) I would cut you down immediately, for that very reason.
Sic semper tyrannis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225134</id>
	<title>Re:Law vs law?</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1266768240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IANAL, but the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as far as I know, is a moral document and isn't legally binding.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL , but the UN Declaration of Human Rights , as far as I know , is a moral document and is n't legally binding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL, but the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as far as I know, is a moral document and isn't legally binding.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</id>
	<title>This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a much bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226738</id>
	<title>Did anyone read the text before commenting?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266870180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand why lobbying of any appointed official or corporate donations to any political cause are tolerated by the people of any nation.  The act and its effects are sick and perverse... and now apparently in a global sense.</p><p>"an online service provider expeditiously removing or disabling access to material or activity, upon receipt of legally sufficient notice of alleged infringement"</p><p>What is legally sufficient?  It sure sounds like the very same DMCA nonsense to me.  ISPs must not be expected to conduct investigations or make legal determinations.  Many will only respond to court orders regardless of what DMCA has to say because they know damn well they can get into more trouble for conducting said investigations and making a determination.</p><p>So we have a case where laws are not applied fairly (damned if you do, damned if you don't) and the DMCA has a proven track record of being used to activly sequelch free speech - especially speech critical of individuals and corporations.. So lets just package it up and export it to other nations?  Perfect.</p><p>PPL will cry copyright and trademark until their blue in the face, if you want to catch criminals then go for it but turning the world into a police state to save ailing 20th century media companies is NOT a tradeoff the average person seems willing to accept.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why lobbying of any appointed official or corporate donations to any political cause are tolerated by the people of any nation .
The act and its effects are sick and perverse... and now apparently in a global sense .
" an online service provider expeditiously removing or disabling access to material or activity , upon receipt of legally sufficient notice of alleged infringement " What is legally sufficient ?
It sure sounds like the very same DMCA nonsense to me .
ISPs must not be expected to conduct investigations or make legal determinations .
Many will only respond to court orders regardless of what DMCA has to say because they know damn well they can get into more trouble for conducting said investigations and making a determination.So we have a case where laws are not applied fairly ( damned if you do , damned if you do n't ) and the DMCA has a proven track record of being used to activly sequelch free speech - especially speech critical of individuals and corporations.. So lets just package it up and export it to other nations ?
Perfect.PPL will cry copyright and trademark until their blue in the face , if you want to catch criminals then go for it but turning the world into a police state to save ailing 20th century media companies is NOT a tradeoff the average person seems willing to accept .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why lobbying of any appointed official or corporate donations to any political cause are tolerated by the people of any nation.
The act and its effects are sick and perverse... and now apparently in a global sense.
"an online service provider expeditiously removing or disabling access to material or activity, upon receipt of legally sufficient notice of alleged infringement"What is legally sufficient?
It sure sounds like the very same DMCA nonsense to me.
ISPs must not be expected to conduct investigations or make legal determinations.
Many will only respond to court orders regardless of what DMCA has to say because they know damn well they can get into more trouble for conducting said investigations and making a determination.So we have a case where laws are not applied fairly (damned if you do, damned if you don't) and the DMCA has a proven track record of being used to activly sequelch free speech - especially speech critical of individuals and corporations.. So lets just package it up and export it to other nations?
Perfect.PPL will cry copyright and trademark until their blue in the face, if you want to catch criminals then go for it but turning the world into a police state to save ailing 20th century media companies is NOT a tradeoff the average person seems willing to accept.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225792</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>dwillden</author>
	<datestamp>1266773100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if this is finalized, and the US trade representative and the President sign the treaty, it still has no force of effect unless and until the Senate Ratifies it.  Which I find very unlikely.
<br> <br>And the Supreme Court (which in its current make-up is currently not likely to allow such a blatant assault on our freedoms) can reject it as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if this is finalized , and the US trade representative and the President sign the treaty , it still has no force of effect unless and until the Senate Ratifies it .
Which I find very unlikely .
And the Supreme Court ( which in its current make-up is currently not likely to allow such a blatant assault on our freedoms ) can reject it as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if this is finalized, and the US trade representative and the President sign the treaty, it still has no force of effect unless and until the Senate Ratifies it.
Which I find very unlikely.
And the Supreme Court (which in its current make-up is currently not likely to allow such a blatant assault on our freedoms) can reject it as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225210</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>biryokumaru</author>
	<datestamp>1266768720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would posit that more peoples lives are ruined by the direct action of the RIAA than terrorists in the United States.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would posit that more peoples lives are ruined by the direct action of the RIAA than terrorists in the United States .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would posit that more peoples lives are ruined by the direct action of the RIAA than terrorists in the United States.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223626</id>
	<title>Fat, Dumb and Happy</title>
	<author>issaqua</author>
	<datestamp>1266757440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most are either too affluent (or is it effluent?), or too desperate, to care about these things.</p><p>The narcissistic direction that western culture has taken - "I'm alright Jack, sucks to be you" - magnifies this issue.  Without concern for the common (greater) good, I think we will ultimately consume ourselves.</p><p>-I.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most are either too affluent ( or is it effluent ?
) , or too desperate , to care about these things.The narcissistic direction that western culture has taken - " I 'm alright Jack , sucks to be you " - magnifies this issue .
Without concern for the common ( greater ) good , I think we will ultimately consume ourselves.-I .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most are either too affluent (or is it effluent?
), or too desperate, to care about these things.The narcissistic direction that western culture has taken - "I'm alright Jack, sucks to be you" - magnifies this issue.
Without concern for the common (greater) good, I think we will ultimately consume ourselves.-I.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226728</id>
	<title>Re:Law vs law?</title>
	<author>Jaazaniah</author>
	<datestamp>1266870060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On Privacy and Human rights: You don't see that stopping the advocates of the full body scanners, or the people at airport gates who can't fly without exposing themselves, yet did nothing to stop the move in the first place. Web cams in laptops used to play Nanny State on unsuspecting kids, all your packets are belong to the NSA, smile for the nudist-cam, and soon to be laws to randomly pull people over for (effectively) no reason - <i> <b>oh yeah, the US is a MODEL for Human Rights adherence these days.</b></i></htmltext>
<tokenext>On Privacy and Human rights : You do n't see that stopping the advocates of the full body scanners , or the people at airport gates who ca n't fly without exposing themselves , yet did nothing to stop the move in the first place .
Web cams in laptops used to play Nanny State on unsuspecting kids , all your packets are belong to the NSA , smile for the nudist-cam , and soon to be laws to randomly pull people over for ( effectively ) no reason - oh yeah , the US is a MODEL for Human Rights adherence these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On Privacy and Human rights: You don't see that stopping the advocates of the full body scanners, or the people at airport gates who can't fly without exposing themselves, yet did nothing to stop the move in the first place.
Web cams in laptops used to play Nanny State on unsuspecting kids, all your packets are belong to the NSA, smile for the nudist-cam, and soon to be laws to randomly pull people over for (effectively) no reason -  oh yeah, the US is a MODEL for Human Rights adherence these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227044</id>
	<title>Re:Crypto</title>
	<author>Blue\_Wombat</author>
	<datestamp>1266831900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, it doesn't matter whether they can trivially break the crypto or not - if this goes through they will be too scared to check anything encrypted transiting their network. All you have to do is send something that you have the copyright to over the net this way (say, for instance, your holiday snapshots). You are using crypto to protect access to a copyrighted work - and if the ISP breaks the crypto to look at it they have broken the DMCA/ACTA! Three strikes and the whole ISP is disconnected?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it does n't matter whether they can trivially break the crypto or not - if this goes through they will be too scared to check anything encrypted transiting their network .
All you have to do is send something that you have the copyright to over the net this way ( say , for instance , your holiday snapshots ) .
You are using crypto to protect access to a copyrighted work - and if the ISP breaks the crypto to look at it they have broken the DMCA/ACTA !
Three strikes and the whole ISP is disconnected ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it doesn't matter whether they can trivially break the crypto or not - if this goes through they will be too scared to check anything encrypted transiting their network.
All you have to do is send something that you have the copyright to over the net this way (say, for instance, your holiday snapshots).
You are using crypto to protect access to a copyrighted work - and if the ISP breaks the crypto to look at it they have broken the DMCA/ACTA!
Three strikes and the whole ISP is disconnected?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316</id>
	<title>Canadian solution</title>
	<author>jvillain</author>
	<datestamp>1266755280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For me the proper solution to the piracy concerns from the US is to stop the import of all movies, music, tv shows and any thing else they are so worried about people stealing at the border. If other countries did it as well then production would move from the US to other locations. Problem solved they wouldn't have to worry about people stealing their content any more. I swear, I try not to hate Americans, but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it. How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one, every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For me the proper solution to the piracy concerns from the US is to stop the import of all movies , music , tv shows and any thing else they are so worried about people stealing at the border .
If other countries did it as well then production would move from the US to other locations .
Problem solved they would n't have to worry about people stealing their content any more .
I swear , I try not to hate Americans , but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it .
How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one , every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me the proper solution to the piracy concerns from the US is to stop the import of all movies, music, tv shows and any thing else they are so worried about people stealing at the border.
If other countries did it as well then production would move from the US to other locations.
Problem solved they wouldn't have to worry about people stealing their content any more.
I swear, I try not to hate Americans, but when they start demanding that we abandon our laws and customs and adopt theirs I just loose it.
How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one, every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224892</id>
	<title>Re:Crypto</title>
	<author>mindstrm</author>
	<datestamp>1266766740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Again... self-signed makes it useless in practice - the ISP could just have gear in place to permanently man-in-the-middle every connection.   Or rather, the government would force them to put it there, and forbid them from talking about it.</p><p>It would prevent casual eavesdropping if the session was already initialized, keys were memorized to see if they changed later, and people actually understood the technology - but, outside technical and crypto circles, people just click "yes".</p><p>Remember the furor about how Firefox 3 handled self-signed certs differently - everyone acted like it was BAD?</p><p>A blackhat can drop a MITM gizmo in any wifi area, say a hotel, that generates a certificate that has the name of the hotel in it.... and middle every connection - and you watch, probably 90\% of users will say "Oh.... weird, lemme read this, huh, must be some hotel hting, i'll just click okay" and on they go........</p><p>I agree, we should all use encryption more - but it takes more discipline and better tools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Again... self-signed makes it useless in practice - the ISP could just have gear in place to permanently man-in-the-middle every connection .
Or rather , the government would force them to put it there , and forbid them from talking about it.It would prevent casual eavesdropping if the session was already initialized , keys were memorized to see if they changed later , and people actually understood the technology - but , outside technical and crypto circles , people just click " yes " .Remember the furor about how Firefox 3 handled self-signed certs differently - everyone acted like it was BAD ? A blackhat can drop a MITM gizmo in any wifi area , say a hotel , that generates a certificate that has the name of the hotel in it.... and middle every connection - and you watch , probably 90 \ % of users will say " Oh.... weird , lem me read this , huh , must be some hotel hting , i 'll just click okay " and on they go........I agree , we should all use encryption more - but it takes more discipline and better tools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Again... self-signed makes it useless in practice - the ISP could just have gear in place to permanently man-in-the-middle every connection.
Or rather, the government would force them to put it there, and forbid them from talking about it.It would prevent casual eavesdropping if the session was already initialized, keys were memorized to see if they changed later, and people actually understood the technology - but, outside technical and crypto circles, people just click "yes".Remember the furor about how Firefox 3 handled self-signed certs differently - everyone acted like it was BAD?A blackhat can drop a MITM gizmo in any wifi area, say a hotel, that generates a certificate that has the name of the hotel in it.... and middle every connection - and you watch, probably 90\% of users will say "Oh.... weird, lemme read this, huh, must be some hotel hting, i'll just click okay" and on they go........I agree, we should all use encryption more - but it takes more discipline and better tools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224336</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1266762420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe that writing to your congressmen and senators is still legal over there so do it. Write a physical letter, they seem to be less likely to get ignored. If enough people say "this issue is important enough to affect my vote in the upcoming election", politicians may sit up and take notice.</p><p>As an Aussie with an upcoming election, can someone tell me how to find out which local politicians I should write to and what sort of things to say to express why ACTA is a bad idea without sounding like someone who just wants to download big media corp content without paying for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe that writing to your congressmen and senators is still legal over there so do it .
Write a physical letter , they seem to be less likely to get ignored .
If enough people say " this issue is important enough to affect my vote in the upcoming election " , politicians may sit up and take notice.As an Aussie with an upcoming election , can someone tell me how to find out which local politicians I should write to and what sort of things to say to express why ACTA is a bad idea without sounding like someone who just wants to download big media corp content without paying for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe that writing to your congressmen and senators is still legal over there so do it.
Write a physical letter, they seem to be less likely to get ignored.
If enough people say "this issue is important enough to affect my vote in the upcoming election", politicians may sit up and take notice.As an Aussie with an upcoming election, can someone tell me how to find out which local politicians I should write to and what sort of things to say to express why ACTA is a bad idea without sounding like someone who just wants to download big media corp content without paying for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>Manchot</author>
	<datestamp>1266761400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find it pathetic that your comment has been modded up, because it proves that you and several others have completely bought into the FUD surrounding ACTA. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate. I repeat, <b>all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate</b>. There is no "treason" here because nothing has been voted on; if the ACTA negotiations are ever finished and it is presented before the Senate, it will automatically become public knowledge. These "leaked" documents that periodically appear are beyond worthless: we have no idea whether they're legitimate or not, so there's no reason to let yourself get worked up over it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it pathetic that your comment has been modded up , because it proves that you and several others have completely bought into the FUD surrounding ACTA .
I 've said it before , and I 'll say it again : all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate .
I repeat , all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate .
There is no " treason " here because nothing has been voted on ; if the ACTA negotiations are ever finished and it is presented before the Senate , it will automatically become public knowledge .
These " leaked " documents that periodically appear are beyond worthless : we have no idea whether they 're legitimate or not , so there 's no reason to let yourself get worked up over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it pathetic that your comment has been modded up, because it proves that you and several others have completely bought into the FUD surrounding ACTA.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate.
I repeat, all treaties must be ratified in public by the Senate.
There is no "treason" here because nothing has been voted on; if the ACTA negotiations are ever finished and it is presented before the Senate, it will automatically become public knowledge.
These "leaked" documents that periodically appear are beyond worthless: we have no idea whether they're legitimate or not, so there's no reason to let yourself get worked up over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224636</id>
	<title>Interesting hypocrisy in this thread</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266764400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the whole,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is very progressive and liberal. It has a history of being very much pro-Obama and anti-Republican. Yet in this thread I see a a lot of people saying much the same thing as what those crazy "teabaggers" are saying. Government and corporations have gotten out of control and need to be toned down. Must be a fluke. Later I'm sure it will be back to its normal liberal slant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the whole , / .
is very progressive and liberal .
It has a history of being very much pro-Obama and anti-Republican .
Yet in this thread I see a a lot of people saying much the same thing as what those crazy " teabaggers " are saying .
Government and corporations have gotten out of control and need to be toned down .
Must be a fluke .
Later I 'm sure it will be back to its normal liberal slant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the whole, /.
is very progressive and liberal.
It has a history of being very much pro-Obama and anti-Republican.
Yet in this thread I see a a lot of people saying much the same thing as what those crazy "teabaggers" are saying.
Government and corporations have gotten out of control and need to be toned down.
Must be a fluke.
Later I'm sure it will be back to its normal liberal slant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227250</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1266835320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not law yet. They'll tell you what the law is when it becomes law and they're good an' sure you can't wiggle out of it with pesky issues such as "habeas corpus" and "constitutional rights."</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not law yet .
They 'll tell you what the law is when it becomes law and they 're good an ' sure you ca n't wiggle out of it with pesky issues such as " habeas corpus " and " constitutional rights .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not law yet.
They'll tell you what the law is when it becomes law and they're good an' sure you can't wiggle out of it with pesky issues such as "habeas corpus" and "constitutional rights.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223080</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1266753960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing? Or do we have no option?</p> </div><p>We have no option. You know how, when talking about annoying/abusive advertising practices, people love to say "you're not the customer, you're the product?"</p><p>Welcome to reality: the government views you exactly the same way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing ?
Or do we have no option ?
We have no option .
You know how , when talking about annoying/abusive advertising practices , people love to say " you 're not the customer , you 're the product ?
" Welcome to reality : the government views you exactly the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing?
Or do we have no option?
We have no option.
You know how, when talking about annoying/abusive advertising practices, people love to say "you're not the customer, you're the product?
"Welcome to reality: the government views you exactly the same way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226674</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>klui</author>
	<datestamp>1266869160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure when the negotiations are over, several thousand pages of crap will be presented to the House and Senate floors an hour before they're to be voted upon. And each person will be told if they don't vote yes, hell will break loose, terrorism will ensue, and "martial law will be in effect," blah, blah, blah.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure when the negotiations are over , several thousand pages of crap will be presented to the House and Senate floors an hour before they 're to be voted upon .
And each person will be told if they do n't vote yes , hell will break loose , terrorism will ensue , and " martial law will be in effect , " blah , blah , blah .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure when the negotiations are over, several thousand pages of crap will be presented to the House and Senate floors an hour before they're to be voted upon.
And each person will be told if they don't vote yes, hell will break loose, terrorism will ensue, and "martial law will be in effect," blah, blah, blah.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224776</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1266765660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> In this case there is a weapon with which to legally terrorise the RIAA, MPAA et al, the creative commons. Simply swap to that model for all your creative needs. Don't buy their content, tell everybody else not to buy their content, shun those that do suck up to their content as being lame arsed. At the very least drop cable TV as a start it sets a terrible precedent of renting content and it's owners are the antitheses of shared content. </p><p> It really is insanely stupid to pay them to steal your rights, to force you into working in poverty and, to corrupt you government. A sustained political effort is required to shake things up, a shift from a two party system to a three or more party system (they don't need to win, they just need the balance of power, greed by the majority powers means they can never work together).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case there is a weapon with which to legally terrorise the RIAA , MPAA et al , the creative commons .
Simply swap to that model for all your creative needs .
Do n't buy their content , tell everybody else not to buy their content , shun those that do suck up to their content as being lame arsed .
At the very least drop cable TV as a start it sets a terrible precedent of renting content and it 's owners are the antitheses of shared content .
It really is insanely stupid to pay them to steal your rights , to force you into working in poverty and , to corrupt you government .
A sustained political effort is required to shake things up , a shift from a two party system to a three or more party system ( they do n't need to win , they just need the balance of power , greed by the majority powers means they can never work together ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> In this case there is a weapon with which to legally terrorise the RIAA, MPAA et al, the creative commons.
Simply swap to that model for all your creative needs.
Don't buy their content, tell everybody else not to buy their content, shun those that do suck up to their content as being lame arsed.
At the very least drop cable TV as a start it sets a terrible precedent of renting content and it's owners are the antitheses of shared content.
It really is insanely stupid to pay them to steal your rights, to force you into working in poverty and, to corrupt you government.
A sustained political effort is required to shake things up, a shift from a two party system to a three or more party system (they don't need to win, they just need the balance of power, greed by the majority powers means they can never work together).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520</id>
	<title>Law vs law?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1266756600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This implies no privacy, as whoever that provides us connectivity with others (ISPs, cell/line phone companies, postal service, web services like email/chat/voice/webcams/etc) as could held liable for what their customers do, that must follow all we do using their services. And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, plus probably most governments constitutions. Will that be enough to stop them or we will not have human rights?<br><br>It makes the worse totalitarian governments in the world in history look like the land of the free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This implies no privacy , as whoever that provides us connectivity with others ( ISPs , cell/line phone companies , postal service , web services like email/chat/voice/webcams/etc ) as could held liable for what their customers do , that must follow all we do using their services .
And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights , plus probably most governments constitutions .
Will that be enough to stop them or we will not have human rights ? It makes the worse totalitarian governments in the world in history look like the land of the free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This implies no privacy, as whoever that provides us connectivity with others (ISPs, cell/line phone companies, postal service, web services like email/chat/voice/webcams/etc) as could held liable for what their customers do, that must follow all we do using their services.
And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, plus probably most governments constitutions.
Will that be enough to stop them or we will not have human rights?It makes the worse totalitarian governments in the world in history look like the land of the free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223964</id>
	<title>First I wondered, how this could land in my spam..</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266760020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then I noticed.</p><p>Incredible, how they managed to sneak Apple advertising even into this story!</p><p>There is more to the world than Apple. Most of the world does not give a shit.</p><p>What we give a shit about though, is ACTA. So keep your stupid advertising out of important topics!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then I noticed.Incredible , how they managed to sneak Apple advertising even into this story ! There is more to the world than Apple .
Most of the world does not give a shit.What we give a shit about though , is ACTA .
So keep your stupid advertising out of important topics !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then I noticed.Incredible, how they managed to sneak Apple advertising even into this story!There is more to the world than Apple.
Most of the world does not give a shit.What we give a shit about though, is ACTA.
So keep your stupid advertising out of important topics!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232736</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>vegiVamp</author>
	<datestamp>1266866700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are not mutually exclusive, however. I daresay he was referring to both of them, but put the more important one first.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are not mutually exclusive , however .
I daresay he was referring to both of them , but put the more important one first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are not mutually exclusive, however.
I daresay he was referring to both of them, but put the more important one first.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227148</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266833700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Samsung was the ONLY company that tried to terminate knock offs.<br>In the end they found the engineers and tried to buy them off and out.</p><p>They laughed, and said they get 50cents to $1 per phone, and said you know how many people in China?</p><p>No matter what , China, India and Russian and Brazil will ensure a big market for what people want - not what others would like.</p><p>They said that with region locked DVD's, then Blurays<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. noise noise noise.<br>I suppose the good side of this is pissed off, unemployed Americans, will be without their multimedia fix, and may actually get angry enough to vote the wallys out</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Samsung was the ONLY company that tried to terminate knock offs.In the end they found the engineers and tried to buy them off and out.They laughed , and said they get 50cents to $ 1 per phone , and said you know how many people in China ? No matter what , China , India and Russian and Brazil will ensure a big market for what people want - not what others would like.They said that with region locked DVD 's , then Blurays .. noise noise noise.I suppose the good side of this is pissed off , unemployed Americans , will be without their multimedia fix , and may actually get angry enough to vote the wallys out</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Samsung was the ONLY company that tried to terminate knock offs.In the end they found the engineers and tried to buy them off and out.They laughed, and said they get 50cents to $1 per phone, and said you know how many people in China?No matter what , China, India and Russian and Brazil will ensure a big market for what people want - not what others would like.They said that with region locked DVD's, then Blurays .. noise noise noise.I suppose the good side of this is pissed off, unemployed Americans, will be without their multimedia fix, and may actually get angry enough to vote the wallys out</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223510</id>
	<title>Anonymous Accusations?</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1266756540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you at least get to know who made a false accusation against you so that you can sue their ass off in civil court where the burden of proof is much lower?  After all, you stand to lose something - shouldn't they?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you at least get to know who made a false accusation against you so that you can sue their ass off in civil court where the burden of proof is much lower ?
After all , you stand to lose something - should n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you at least get to know who made a false accusation against you so that you can sue their ass off in civil court where the burden of proof is much lower?
After all, you stand to lose something - shouldn't they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223300</id>
	<title>The hiding of the bill's creation is only half</title>
	<author>You'reJustSlashFlock</author>
	<datestamp>1266755160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hiding of the bill's creation is only half of the fearful part of the legislative process.</p><p>The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmca" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">DMCA</a> [wikipedia.org] was passed with not one legislature sigining a name to it.  It passed the House through voice vote and the Senate through unanimous consent.  They knew what they were doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hiding of the bill 's creation is only half of the fearful part of the legislative process.The DMCA [ wikipedia.org ] was passed with not one legislature sigining a name to it .
It passed the House through voice vote and the Senate through unanimous consent .
They knew what they were doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hiding of the bill's creation is only half of the fearful part of the legislative process.The DMCA [wikipedia.org] was passed with not one legislature sigining a name to it.
It passed the House through voice vote and the Senate through unanimous consent.
They knew what they were doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226780</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>colonelquesadilla</author>
	<datestamp>1266870960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As much as I hate to admit it, I think the better thing to do right now would be stock up on food, ammunition if you are so inclined and other things that might become scarce.  The intellectual property thing is a very strange development, but basically the US has no more material exports.  We are gambling that we will be able to monetize IP long term, thereby closing our trade deficit without producing physical goods.  It could go well, if we monopolize the world engineering market without having to build anything here and still get the profits we'll be insanely rich.  Somehow I don't think it'll work out that way, especially the way our currency is doing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I hate to admit it , I think the better thing to do right now would be stock up on food , ammunition if you are so inclined and other things that might become scarce .
The intellectual property thing is a very strange development , but basically the US has no more material exports .
We are gambling that we will be able to monetize IP long term , thereby closing our trade deficit without producing physical goods .
It could go well , if we monopolize the world engineering market without having to build anything here and still get the profits we 'll be insanely rich .
Somehow I do n't think it 'll work out that way , especially the way our currency is doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I hate to admit it, I think the better thing to do right now would be stock up on food, ammunition if you are so inclined and other things that might become scarce.
The intellectual property thing is a very strange development, but basically the US has no more material exports.
We are gambling that we will be able to monetize IP long term, thereby closing our trade deficit without producing physical goods.
It could go well, if we monopolize the world engineering market without having to build anything here and still get the profits we'll be insanely rich.
Somehow I don't think it'll work out that way, especially the way our currency is doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223500</id>
	<title>Three what?</title>
	<author>chilvence</author>
	<datestamp>1266756480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most aggravating thing about this three strikes rule is that it is so obviously based on an obsessive baseball fanaticism.... making it impossible to disguise the fact that it is actually the kind of half baked idea thought up in 30 seconds in a bar somewhere and scribbled on the back of a beer coaster so that it wouldnt be forgotten in tomorrows hangover. That is exactly the kind of flippant attitude to problems that nobody in the world deserves to have forced upon them.</p><p>Besides, if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world, you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport!</p><p>(thats the one with the round ball by the way)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most aggravating thing about this three strikes rule is that it is so obviously based on an obsessive baseball fanaticism.... making it impossible to disguise the fact that it is actually the kind of half baked idea thought up in 30 seconds in a bar somewhere and scribbled on the back of a beer coaster so that it wouldnt be forgotten in tomorrows hangover .
That is exactly the kind of flippant attitude to problems that nobody in the world deserves to have forced upon them.Besides , if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world , you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport !
( thats the one with the round ball by the way )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most aggravating thing about this three strikes rule is that it is so obviously based on an obsessive baseball fanaticism.... making it impossible to disguise the fact that it is actually the kind of half baked idea thought up in 30 seconds in a bar somewhere and scribbled on the back of a beer coaster so that it wouldnt be forgotten in tomorrows hangover.
That is exactly the kind of flippant attitude to problems that nobody in the world deserves to have forced upon them.Besides, if you yanks were going to try and pull a fast one on the rest of the world, you should have used a football analogy - its the international sport!
(thats the one with the round ball by the way)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225498</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1266770820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the citizens are actively prevented from knowing the law, ignorance is now a valid excuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the citizens are actively prevented from knowing the law , ignorance is now a valid excuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the citizens are actively prevented from knowing the law, ignorance is now a valid excuse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233148</id>
	<title>Re:ISP Reason for Public Domain</title>
	<author>Jewfro\_Macabbi</author>
	<datestamp>1266868320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with pitting ISP's against the content industry is that ISP's often are the content industry. Comcast "Cable". "Time Warner Cable", AT&amp;T sells U-Verse, etc...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with pitting ISP 's against the content industry is that ISP 's often are the content industry .
Comcast " Cable " .
" Time Warner Cable " , AT&amp;T sells U-Verse , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with pitting ISP's against the content industry is that ISP's often are the content industry.
Comcast "Cable".
"Time Warner Cable", AT&amp;T sells U-Verse, etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226942</id>
	<title>what about VPNs?</title>
	<author>Jorgandar</author>
	<datestamp>1266830340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if i connect to the internet via VPN?  Does this law apply to VPN vendors?  (They aren't technically ISPs).  If the VPN guys have to snoop through your activity to find out whether you're downloading an mp3, kinda defeats the entire point doesn't it.  Would this kill an entire industry?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if i connect to the internet via VPN ?
Does this law apply to VPN vendors ?
( They are n't technically ISPs ) .
If the VPN guys have to snoop through your activity to find out whether you 're downloading an mp3 , kinda defeats the entire point does n't it .
Would this kill an entire industry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if i connect to the internet via VPN?
Does this law apply to VPN vendors?
(They aren't technically ISPs).
If the VPN guys have to snoop through your activity to find out whether you're downloading an mp3, kinda defeats the entire point doesn't it.
Would this kill an entire industry?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223412</id>
	<title>meanwhile rapists go free as do murderers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266755940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is it revolution time yet?</p><p>any of these mpa seem like economic terrorists yet?</p><p>do you all realize what happens when they enact and were all forced to comply and hte net affectively goes completely dark</p><p>do you realize you will be come a facist slave as hitler would have wanted?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is it revolution time yet ? any of these mpa seem like economic terrorists yet ? do you all realize what happens when they enact and were all forced to comply and hte net affectively goes completely darkdo you realize you will be come a facist slave as hitler would have wanted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is it revolution time yet?any of these mpa seem like economic terrorists yet?do you all realize what happens when they enact and were all forced to comply and hte net affectively goes completely darkdo you realize you will be come a facist slave as hitler would have wanted?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226028</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>dwillden</author>
	<datestamp>1266775080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let your Senators know everything wrong with this proposed treaty.  The President and his trade reps can sign anything they want.  It still has to be ratified by the Senate.<br> <br>
What this leaked document should be is a call for very U.S. based<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. reader to start contacting his/her Senators, and using any forums they have access to to raise public awareness of this issue.
<br> <br>This is why Copenhagen didn't really concern me, it's why we never heeded Kyoto, the Senate shot it down.<br> <br>  It's one thing for the executive branch to sign a treaty, pledging away our rights in the name of international cooperation.  It's another thing for the Senate to actually ratify such a treaty.  And the failure to ratify such damaging treaties is rarely along party lines.  <br> <br>The Media industry will open it's pockets in support of the treaty.  The tech/internet/software/consumer products and many other industries as well as many other interest groups will open their pockets in opposition.  I don't see any treaty negotiated in secrecy, and so blatantly signing away basic freedoms as getting much support in the Senate.<br> <br>But it requires vigilance and effort in spreading the word, and letting our fellow citizens know how bad this treaty is.  You get enough people complaining and congress critters do actually listen.  But it takes a lot of complaints and we as a people have tended to be too lazy to put much effort into opposing many bad laws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let your Senators know everything wrong with this proposed treaty .
The President and his trade reps can sign anything they want .
It still has to be ratified by the Senate .
What this leaked document should be is a call for very U.S. based / .
reader to start contacting his/her Senators , and using any forums they have access to to raise public awareness of this issue .
This is why Copenhagen did n't really concern me , it 's why we never heeded Kyoto , the Senate shot it down .
It 's one thing for the executive branch to sign a treaty , pledging away our rights in the name of international cooperation .
It 's another thing for the Senate to actually ratify such a treaty .
And the failure to ratify such damaging treaties is rarely along party lines .
The Media industry will open it 's pockets in support of the treaty .
The tech/internet/software/consumer products and many other industries as well as many other interest groups will open their pockets in opposition .
I do n't see any treaty negotiated in secrecy , and so blatantly signing away basic freedoms as getting much support in the Senate .
But it requires vigilance and effort in spreading the word , and letting our fellow citizens know how bad this treaty is .
You get enough people complaining and congress critters do actually listen .
But it takes a lot of complaints and we as a people have tended to be too lazy to put much effort into opposing many bad laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let your Senators know everything wrong with this proposed treaty.
The President and his trade reps can sign anything they want.
It still has to be ratified by the Senate.
What this leaked document should be is a call for very U.S. based /.
reader to start contacting his/her Senators, and using any forums they have access to to raise public awareness of this issue.
This is why Copenhagen didn't really concern me, it's why we never heeded Kyoto, the Senate shot it down.
It's one thing for the executive branch to sign a treaty, pledging away our rights in the name of international cooperation.
It's another thing for the Senate to actually ratify such a treaty.
And the failure to ratify such damaging treaties is rarely along party lines.
The Media industry will open it's pockets in support of the treaty.
The tech/internet/software/consumer products and many other industries as well as many other interest groups will open their pockets in opposition.
I don't see any treaty negotiated in secrecy, and so blatantly signing away basic freedoms as getting much support in the Senate.
But it requires vigilance and effort in spreading the word, and letting our fellow citizens know how bad this treaty is.
You get enough people complaining and congress critters do actually listen.
But it takes a lot of complaints and we as a people have tended to be too lazy to put much effort into opposing many bad laws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225128</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't matter</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1266768240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The fact is it doesn't matter if you have done anything wrong. The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight (try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen).</p></div></blockquote><p>But do they? Have they actually managed to prosecute anyone for their 3-a-day felonies? Have they managed to actually freeze anyone's assets over these felonies? You can't just freeze assets over any crime.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact is it does n't matter if you have done anything wrong .
The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight ( try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen ) .But do they ?
Have they actually managed to prosecute anyone for their 3-a-day felonies ?
Have they managed to actually freeze anyone 's assets over these felonies ?
You ca n't just freeze assets over any crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact is it doesn't matter if you have done anything wrong.
The current state is that the government can prosecute just about anybody on vague laws and make it extremely difficult to fight (try hiring a lawyer will all your assets frozen).But do they?
Have they actually managed to prosecute anyone for their 3-a-day felonies?
Have they managed to actually freeze anyone's assets over these felonies?
You can't just freeze assets over any crime.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223720</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Redwing</author>
	<datestamp>1266758100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>..., but this treaty has changed my outlook.</p></div><p>Changing your mail client will not solve this problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... , but this treaty has changed my outlook.Changing your mail client will not solve this problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ..., but this treaty has changed my outlook.Changing your mail client will not solve this problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666</id>
	<title>Crypto</title>
	<author>Ernesto Alvarez</author>
	<datestamp>1266764700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ISPs are not even remotely interested in scanning for copyright violations. It is a heavy burden that provides no benefit for them and is a technical and logistical nightmare.</p><p>I think part of the solution is to increase the use of cryptography. By that I mean putting TLS (or whatever) on everything.</p><p>If everybody encrypts everything, even just using self signed certificates, ISPs can no longer monitor the traffic. Even more important it gives them the chance of saying "We're very sorry, but due to the generalized ciphering we are unable to prove any copyright infringement. This month we have not banned anyone.". They could also claim inability to do a man-in-the-middle for fear of discovery when (when, not if) the **AA asks them to do it (after all, you can never be sure if you've exchanged fingerprints before using that self signed certificate).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISPs are not even remotely interested in scanning for copyright violations .
It is a heavy burden that provides no benefit for them and is a technical and logistical nightmare.I think part of the solution is to increase the use of cryptography .
By that I mean putting TLS ( or whatever ) on everything.If everybody encrypts everything , even just using self signed certificates , ISPs can no longer monitor the traffic .
Even more important it gives them the chance of saying " We 're very sorry , but due to the generalized ciphering we are unable to prove any copyright infringement .
This month we have not banned anyone. " .
They could also claim inability to do a man-in-the-middle for fear of discovery when ( when , not if ) the * * AA asks them to do it ( after all , you can never be sure if you 've exchanged fingerprints before using that self signed certificate ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISPs are not even remotely interested in scanning for copyright violations.
It is a heavy burden that provides no benefit for them and is a technical and logistical nightmare.I think part of the solution is to increase the use of cryptography.
By that I mean putting TLS (or whatever) on everything.If everybody encrypts everything, even just using self signed certificates, ISPs can no longer monitor the traffic.
Even more important it gives them the chance of saying "We're very sorry, but due to the generalized ciphering we are unable to prove any copyright infringement.
This month we have not banned anyone.".
They could also claim inability to do a man-in-the-middle for fear of discovery when (when, not if) the **AA asks them to do it (after all, you can never be sure if you've exchanged fingerprints before using that self signed certificate).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223102</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>introspekt.i</author>
	<datestamp>1266754080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>China doesn't seem to be a big player in software or IP in general..at least from what I've seen, I could be wrong.  I wouldn't get in on a treaty that doesn't benefit me in the same way it benefits everybody else, which, to me, it seems like China would be getting the raw end of the deal I'd think they'd be entirely rational to ignore the ACTA treaty stuff...whatever it is anyway.  That being said, I think countries who bind themselves up in these deals while HUGE countries like China sit it out are really just shooting themselves in the foot.  Agreeing with the OP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>China does n't seem to be a big player in software or IP in general..at least from what I 've seen , I could be wrong .
I would n't get in on a treaty that does n't benefit me in the same way it benefits everybody else , which , to me , it seems like China would be getting the raw end of the deal I 'd think they 'd be entirely rational to ignore the ACTA treaty stuff...whatever it is anyway .
That being said , I think countries who bind themselves up in these deals while HUGE countries like China sit it out are really just shooting themselves in the foot .
Agreeing with the OP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China doesn't seem to be a big player in software or IP in general..at least from what I've seen, I could be wrong.
I wouldn't get in on a treaty that doesn't benefit me in the same way it benefits everybody else, which, to me, it seems like China would be getting the raw end of the deal I'd think they'd be entirely rational to ignore the ACTA treaty stuff...whatever it is anyway.
That being said, I think countries who bind themselves up in these deals while HUGE countries like China sit it out are really just shooting themselves in the foot.
Agreeing with the OP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223934</id>
	<title>unenforceable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266759840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>seriously, let them pass every goddamn unenforceable law they want</p><p>ten million technologically sophisticated, media hungry and POOR teenagers have them beat, sight unseen. they simply cannot enforce ACTA. seriously. its castles in the sky</p><p>i understand completely the concept of a legal framework to encourage the creation of cultural works via economic incentives</p><p>except what they are talking about goes WAY WAY beyond that concept and extends into the realm of corporate ownership of culture for no purpose that serves the general public in any way whatsoever</p><p>seriously, when</p><p>1. grandchildren of some guy who wrote a song are legally entitled to a cash flow, and<br>2. when pseudolegal structures are empowered to intrusively monitor the supposed free exchange of ideas central to a healthy society,</p><p>then the very idea of intellectual property law is philosophically and morally broken, and must simply be ignored and/ or outright actively destroyed by anyone with a moral compass and a passion for the concepts underlying western liberal democracy</p><p>ip law is a parasitical device distribution companies have bought and paid for via legislative interference to somehow validate their existence. distribution companies that have simply been replaced by the internet. they can buy all the fucking laws and all the prostitute legislators and all the legions of corporate legal goons. who fucking cares. unless they actually break the internet to the extent of china and iran, which even their legislative whores would feel uncomfortable about, their entire legal fantasy is an unenforceable joke for some highly motivated teenagers to route around, package as a point and click interface, and give away for free</p><p>technological progress is a bitch. no law can trump it unless you want to stop the very notion of progress itself. so for all of the power of media companies, i simply don't see them powerful enough to crush the foundational concepts of western liberal democracy simply in order to retain their antiquated reason for existence</p><p>death throes of a dinosaur. people should fucking know when they are defeated already. and the entirety of the media industry has most certainly been defeated</p><p>if they won't go peacefully, we'll just kill them. p2p is only the beginning. there are a million more technologically sophisticated methods. dark nets. steganography. obfuscation. protocol impersonation. and best of all: play countries against each other. set up shop in one, jump to the other. always a step ahead of the assholes. who are we? any goddamn poor terenager. there's no structure needed. a simple desire for one's own culture is the only imperative needed to defeat these assholes. let them sniff all they want. it's a pandora's box. a hydra: cut off its head, we grow ten more. they're doomed. let's make sure they fucking know it</p><p>bring it on media corporate assholes. bring all your legal goons and all your bought and paid for legislative puppets and all your paid for tech hacks and all your pseudo corporate governmental entities. we have you beat, and we welcome the fight in the name of the greatest principles of the free exchange of ideas and a free society and simple moral integrity. you're fucked, and your defeat is for the common good</p><p>you can't own our culture. we won't let you. we are simply motivated for the love of music, literature, and cinema. you don't own it. we the people do. fuck off and die. we will burn your toll booths to the ground</p><p>bring it on. bring your worst. we have you beaten, hard</p><p>i spit on you corporate assholes. i relish your comeuppance</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>seriously , let them pass every goddamn unenforceable law they wantten million technologically sophisticated , media hungry and POOR teenagers have them beat , sight unseen .
they simply can not enforce ACTA .
seriously. its castles in the skyi understand completely the concept of a legal framework to encourage the creation of cultural works via economic incentivesexcept what they are talking about goes WAY WAY beyond that concept and extends into the realm of corporate ownership of culture for no purpose that serves the general public in any way whatsoeverseriously , when1 .
grandchildren of some guy who wrote a song are legally entitled to a cash flow , and2 .
when pseudolegal structures are empowered to intrusively monitor the supposed free exchange of ideas central to a healthy society,then the very idea of intellectual property law is philosophically and morally broken , and must simply be ignored and/ or outright actively destroyed by anyone with a moral compass and a passion for the concepts underlying western liberal democracyip law is a parasitical device distribution companies have bought and paid for via legislative interference to somehow validate their existence .
distribution companies that have simply been replaced by the internet .
they can buy all the fucking laws and all the prostitute legislators and all the legions of corporate legal goons .
who fucking cares .
unless they actually break the internet to the extent of china and iran , which even their legislative whores would feel uncomfortable about , their entire legal fantasy is an unenforceable joke for some highly motivated teenagers to route around , package as a point and click interface , and give away for freetechnological progress is a bitch .
no law can trump it unless you want to stop the very notion of progress itself .
so for all of the power of media companies , i simply do n't see them powerful enough to crush the foundational concepts of western liberal democracy simply in order to retain their antiquated reason for existencedeath throes of a dinosaur .
people should fucking know when they are defeated already .
and the entirety of the media industry has most certainly been defeatedif they wo n't go peacefully , we 'll just kill them .
p2p is only the beginning .
there are a million more technologically sophisticated methods .
dark nets .
steganography. obfuscation .
protocol impersonation .
and best of all : play countries against each other .
set up shop in one , jump to the other .
always a step ahead of the assholes .
who are we ?
any goddamn poor terenager .
there 's no structure needed .
a simple desire for one 's own culture is the only imperative needed to defeat these assholes .
let them sniff all they want .
it 's a pandora 's box .
a hydra : cut off its head , we grow ten more .
they 're doomed .
let 's make sure they fucking know itbring it on media corporate assholes .
bring all your legal goons and all your bought and paid for legislative puppets and all your paid for tech hacks and all your pseudo corporate governmental entities .
we have you beat , and we welcome the fight in the name of the greatest principles of the free exchange of ideas and a free society and simple moral integrity .
you 're fucked , and your defeat is for the common goodyou ca n't own our culture .
we wo n't let you .
we are simply motivated for the love of music , literature , and cinema .
you do n't own it .
we the people do .
fuck off and die .
we will burn your toll booths to the groundbring it on .
bring your worst .
we have you beaten , hardi spit on you corporate assholes .
i relish your comeuppance</tokentext>
<sentencetext>seriously, let them pass every goddamn unenforceable law they wantten million technologically sophisticated, media hungry and POOR teenagers have them beat, sight unseen.
they simply cannot enforce ACTA.
seriously. its castles in the skyi understand completely the concept of a legal framework to encourage the creation of cultural works via economic incentivesexcept what they are talking about goes WAY WAY beyond that concept and extends into the realm of corporate ownership of culture for no purpose that serves the general public in any way whatsoeverseriously, when1.
grandchildren of some guy who wrote a song are legally entitled to a cash flow, and2.
when pseudolegal structures are empowered to intrusively monitor the supposed free exchange of ideas central to a healthy society,then the very idea of intellectual property law is philosophically and morally broken, and must simply be ignored and/ or outright actively destroyed by anyone with a moral compass and a passion for the concepts underlying western liberal democracyip law is a parasitical device distribution companies have bought and paid for via legislative interference to somehow validate their existence.
distribution companies that have simply been replaced by the internet.
they can buy all the fucking laws and all the prostitute legislators and all the legions of corporate legal goons.
who fucking cares.
unless they actually break the internet to the extent of china and iran, which even their legislative whores would feel uncomfortable about, their entire legal fantasy is an unenforceable joke for some highly motivated teenagers to route around, package as a point and click interface, and give away for freetechnological progress is a bitch.
no law can trump it unless you want to stop the very notion of progress itself.
so for all of the power of media companies, i simply don't see them powerful enough to crush the foundational concepts of western liberal democracy simply in order to retain their antiquated reason for existencedeath throes of a dinosaur.
people should fucking know when they are defeated already.
and the entirety of the media industry has most certainly been defeatedif they won't go peacefully, we'll just kill them.
p2p is only the beginning.
there are a million more technologically sophisticated methods.
dark nets.
steganography. obfuscation.
protocol impersonation.
and best of all: play countries against each other.
set up shop in one, jump to the other.
always a step ahead of the assholes.
who are we?
any goddamn poor terenager.
there's no structure needed.
a simple desire for one's own culture is the only imperative needed to defeat these assholes.
let them sniff all they want.
it's a pandora's box.
a hydra: cut off its head, we grow ten more.
they're doomed.
let's make sure they fucking know itbring it on media corporate assholes.
bring all your legal goons and all your bought and paid for legislative puppets and all your paid for tech hacks and all your pseudo corporate governmental entities.
we have you beat, and we welcome the fight in the name of the greatest principles of the free exchange of ideas and a free society and simple moral integrity.
you're fucked, and your defeat is for the common goodyou can't own our culture.
we won't let you.
we are simply motivated for the love of music, literature, and cinema.
you don't own it.
we the people do.
fuck off and die.
we will burn your toll booths to the groundbring it on.
bring your worst.
we have you beaten, hardi spit on you corporate assholes.
i relish your comeuppance</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223066</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1266753840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They don't play baseball?</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't play baseball ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't play baseball?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226172</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1266776460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's pathetic is that you care so little for your freedom that you're happy for laws to be passed without any public debate so long as you're eventually notified. You can keep not getting yourself worked up over them. Some of us however find it scary that a situation can exist in which such "leaks" are so common.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's pathetic is that you care so little for your freedom that you 're happy for laws to be passed without any public debate so long as you 're eventually notified .
You can keep not getting yourself worked up over them .
Some of us however find it scary that a situation can exist in which such " leaks " are so common .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's pathetic is that you care so little for your freedom that you're happy for laws to be passed without any public debate so long as you're eventually notified.
You can keep not getting yourself worked up over them.
Some of us however find it scary that a situation can exist in which such "leaks" are so common.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224162</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266761220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, you can do many things.</p><p>You can get the word out. (But beware to not act or sound like a crazy or raging person. They have to want to listen to you!)<br>If you are relatively skilled in PR / politics / marketing / psychology / social engineering / etc, you can create a critical mass of people agreeing with you. They will then take care of things... the hard way.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Or you can go guerillia (= the best war strategy for minorities) and create a virus that lands on ACTA creator/supporter computers/sites, has a highly illegal payload (child porn, movies, secret documents, illegal books, etc), and then automatically tells the cops to go raid the house.</p><p>You can create, support, install and spread darknets to everyone.</p><p>You can move to a still free country. (Or create your own. [You wouldn&rsquo;t be the first one!])</p><p>Etc, etc, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you can do many things.You can get the word out .
( But beware to not act or sound like a crazy or raging person .
They have to want to listen to you !
) If you are relatively skilled in PR / politics / marketing / psychology / social engineering / etc , you can create a critical mass of people agreeing with you .
They will then take care of things... the hard way .
; ) Or you can go guerillia ( = the best war strategy for minorities ) and create a virus that lands on ACTA creator/supporter computers/sites , has a highly illegal payload ( child porn , movies , secret documents , illegal books , etc ) , and then automatically tells the cops to go raid the house.You can create , support , install and spread darknets to everyone.You can move to a still free country .
( Or create your own .
[ You wouldn    t be the first one !
] ) Etc , etc , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you can do many things.You can get the word out.
(But beware to not act or sound like a crazy or raging person.
They have to want to listen to you!
)If you are relatively skilled in PR / politics / marketing / psychology / social engineering / etc, you can create a critical mass of people agreeing with you.
They will then take care of things... the hard way.
;)Or you can go guerillia (= the best war strategy for minorities) and create a virus that lands on ACTA creator/supporter computers/sites, has a highly illegal payload (child porn, movies, secret documents, illegal books, etc), and then automatically tells the cops to go raid the house.You can create, support, install and spread darknets to everyone.You can move to a still free country.
(Or create your own.
[You wouldn’t be the first one!
])Etc, etc, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224274</id>
	<title>Re:Keep dreaming *AA</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1266761940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Lofty goals. This isn't enforceable, legally or practically. Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet? How? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working? Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi? How will they shut down Freenet? How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend?</p><p>This isn't going to change anything.</p></div><p>(In my best Morpheus impression when speaking to Neo during training).  What makes you think these laws have anything to do with enforcement?  You think they care about what numbers they change on this Internet?</p><p>Remember NO law is ever suggested without it ultimately meaning money and/or power to someone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lofty goals .
This is n't enforceable , legally or practically .
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet ?
How ? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working ?
Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi ?
How will they shut down Freenet ?
How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend ? This is n't going to change anything .
( In my best Morpheus impression when speaking to Neo during training ) .
What makes you think these laws have anything to do with enforcement ?
You think they care about what numbers they change on this Internet ? Remember NO law is ever suggested without it ultimately meaning money and/or power to someone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lofty goals.
This isn't enforceable, legally or practically.
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet?
How? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working?
Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi?
How will they shut down Freenet?
How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend?This isn't going to change anything.
(In my best Morpheus impression when speaking to Neo during training).
What makes you think these laws have anything to do with enforcement?
You think they care about what numbers they change on this Internet?Remember NO law is ever suggested without it ultimately meaning money and/or power to someone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227098</id>
	<title>Re:Canadian solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266832800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one, every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US?</p></div><p>The EU and UN work hard to spread gun control, AFAICT the US has never forced the 2nd amendment on any other country. When the anti-gunners do it is it ok?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one , every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US ? The EU and UN work hard to spread gun control , AFAICT the US has never forced the 2nd amendment on any other country .
When the anti-gunners do it is it ok ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long till the next secret treaty is about making every one, every where abandon their gun control laws because that is how it is in the US?The EU and UN work hard to spread gun control, AFAICT the US has never forced the 2nd amendment on any other country.
When the anti-gunners do it is it ok?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31234790</id>
	<title>Where do I get a list of countries?</title>
	<author>marcosdumay</author>
	<datestamp>1266830280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there any lis of countries on their site? How do I know if Brazil is a party?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there any lis of countries on their site ?
How do I know if Brazil is a party ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there any lis of countries on their site?
How do I know if Brazil is a party?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223364</id>
	<title>Re:Verizon will have to be shut down.</title>
	<author>mirix</author>
	<datestamp>1266755580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope that at the very least a pathetic patchwork of internet, for the geeks, by the geeks, rises from the ashes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope that at the very least a pathetic patchwork of internet , for the geeks , by the geeks , rises from the ashes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope that at the very least a pathetic patchwork of internet, for the geeks, by the geeks, rises from the ashes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224886</id>
	<title>Re:been accused counts as a strike = easy DOS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266766740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It will get even worse than that when they try to "fix" the DOS problem by only letting a certain group of "trusted" people make accusations. Then, that group will control who has freedom of speech, and the rest won't be trustworthy enough to question their authority.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It will get even worse than that when they try to " fix " the DOS problem by only letting a certain group of " trusted " people make accusations .
Then , that group will control who has freedom of speech , and the rest wo n't be trustworthy enough to question their authority .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It will get even worse than that when they try to "fix" the DOS problem by only letting a certain group of "trusted" people make accusations.
Then, that group will control who has freedom of speech, and the rest won't be trustworthy enough to question their authority.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224604</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266764220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Where's the anti-terrorism legislation now?"</p><p>It's called the Second Amendment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Where 's the anti-terrorism legislation now ?
" It 's called the Second Amendment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Where's the anti-terrorism legislation now?
"It's called the Second Amendment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226264</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>FiloEleven</author>
	<datestamp>1266777660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Writing is good and if you have the inclination, do it.  Calling the offices (home and DC) of your senator (since this is a treaty) is very quick and almost as effectual as snail mail.  I personally call for important matters and email for back-burner stuff.  I never got along well with the postal system.</p><p>Just as important as contacting your reps is convincing others to do the same.  This is why I prefer to suggest phone calls: they can be done on a whim and they're quicker than post and email because you get to air your views to a live person on the other end of the line who can gauge how you feel by your tone (please remain civil and avoid run-on sentences like this one).  If you convince other people to call and to talk to <em>their</em> friends, soon enough the staffers on the other end are going to feel like <em>everybody</em> hates this thing, and they'd better tell the boss or they might be blamed when he loses his next election because of it.</p><p>Public pressure is our greatest tool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Writing is good and if you have the inclination , do it .
Calling the offices ( home and DC ) of your senator ( since this is a treaty ) is very quick and almost as effectual as snail mail .
I personally call for important matters and email for back-burner stuff .
I never got along well with the postal system.Just as important as contacting your reps is convincing others to do the same .
This is why I prefer to suggest phone calls : they can be done on a whim and they 're quicker than post and email because you get to air your views to a live person on the other end of the line who can gauge how you feel by your tone ( please remain civil and avoid run-on sentences like this one ) .
If you convince other people to call and to talk to their friends , soon enough the staffers on the other end are going to feel like everybody hates this thing , and they 'd better tell the boss or they might be blamed when he loses his next election because of it.Public pressure is our greatest tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Writing is good and if you have the inclination, do it.
Calling the offices (home and DC) of your senator (since this is a treaty) is very quick and almost as effectual as snail mail.
I personally call for important matters and email for back-burner stuff.
I never got along well with the postal system.Just as important as contacting your reps is convincing others to do the same.
This is why I prefer to suggest phone calls: they can be done on a whim and they're quicker than post and email because you get to air your views to a live person on the other end of the line who can gauge how you feel by your tone (please remain civil and avoid run-on sentences like this one).
If you convince other people to call and to talk to their friends, soon enough the staffers on the other end are going to feel like everybody hates this thing, and they'd better tell the boss or they might be blamed when he loses his next election because of it.Public pressure is our greatest tool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224336</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227342</id>
	<title>Good luck</title>
	<author>bdunogier</author>
	<datestamp>1266836280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I wish you guys good luck with this.</p><p>We have done our best in EU to fight against france three-strikes law, but it ended up voted anyway, despite a VERY strong opposition. We are now waiting to see how it will be applied, since nothing concrete was published yet, except a few names and theories...</p><p>Our best hopes is that internet users have always been one step ahead of control powers, and this will end up a technical joke. But on the other hand, our worst fear is that another law voted a few days ago also allows for network filtering, officially against terrorism and child pornography, but isn't closed to any other reason. And we all know that fighting file sharing is at least as important (financially) as fighting terrorism...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I wish you guys good luck with this.We have done our best in EU to fight against france three-strikes law , but it ended up voted anyway , despite a VERY strong opposition .
We are now waiting to see how it will be applied , since nothing concrete was published yet , except a few names and theories...Our best hopes is that internet users have always been one step ahead of control powers , and this will end up a technical joke .
But on the other hand , our worst fear is that another law voted a few days ago also allows for network filtering , officially against terrorism and child pornography , but is n't closed to any other reason .
And we all know that fighting file sharing is at least as important ( financially ) as fighting terrorism.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I wish you guys good luck with this.We have done our best in EU to fight against france three-strikes law, but it ended up voted anyway, despite a VERY strong opposition.
We are now waiting to see how it will be applied, since nothing concrete was published yet, except a few names and theories...Our best hopes is that internet users have always been one step ahead of control powers, and this will end up a technical joke.
But on the other hand, our worst fear is that another law voted a few days ago also allows for network filtering, officially against terrorism and child pornography, but isn't closed to any other reason.
And we all know that fighting file sharing is at least as important (financially) as fighting terrorism...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227206</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1266834660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>4. Get a gun, and take it to ACTA's head quarters. That's what the Second Amendment is for. As others have said, ACTA is high treason, and needs to be dealt with as such.</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 .
Get a gun , and take it to ACTA 's head quarters .
That 's what the Second Amendment is for .
As others have said , ACTA is high treason , and needs to be dealt with as such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4.
Get a gun, and take it to ACTA's head quarters.
That's what the Second Amendment is for.
As others have said, ACTA is high treason, and needs to be dealt with as such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225832</id>
	<title>Democracy is dead - Long live democracy</title>
	<author>Demonoid-Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1266773640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the leaked document is real, then democracy is dead. That the ACTA talks are secret to begin with should have been proof enough - that the document (sic) contradicts (three-strike and carrier/vendor responsibility) the claims of the British and my government (Australia) is just proof-beyond-proof.<p>I'll let others decide the appropriate response/preparedness. Though I suggest you do it very quietly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the leaked document is real , then democracy is dead .
That the ACTA talks are secret to begin with should have been proof enough - that the document ( sic ) contradicts ( three-strike and carrier/vendor responsibility ) the claims of the British and my government ( Australia ) is just proof-beyond-proof.I 'll let others decide the appropriate response/preparedness .
Though I suggest you do it very quietly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the leaked document is real, then democracy is dead.
That the ACTA talks are secret to begin with should have been proof enough - that the document (sic) contradicts (three-strike and carrier/vendor responsibility) the claims of the British and my government (Australia) is just proof-beyond-proof.I'll let others decide the appropriate response/preparedness.
Though I suggest you do it very quietly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368</id>
	<title>Keep dreaming *AA</title>
	<author>sqrt(2)</author>
	<datestamp>1266755580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lofty goals. This isn't enforceable, legally or practically. Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet? How? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working? Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi? How will they shut down Freenet? How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend?</p><p>This isn't going to change anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lofty goals .
This is n't enforceable , legally or practically .
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet ?
How ? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working ?
Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi ?
How will they shut down Freenet ?
How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend ? This is n't going to change anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lofty goals.
This isn't enforceable, legally or practically.
Three strikes and you get kicked off the internet?
How? Will I have a chip in my arm that keeps my router from working?
Even if they were somehow able to blacklist me from every ISP how would they stop me from using freely available Wifi?
How will they shut down Freenet?
How will they stop me from burning CDs and just handing it to my friend?This isn't going to change anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224916</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266766860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.</p></div></blockquote><p>Our interests != What we want. I think you were referring to the latter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.Our interests ! = What we want .
I think you were referring to the latter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.Our interests != What we want.
I think you were referring to the latter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223294</id>
	<title>Disproportionate punishment</title>
	<author>mudshark</author>
	<datestamp>1266755100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>People have been using the postal service to commit fraud for decades, but even repeat offenders are not banned from sending or receiving mail. And when was the last time you heard of someone getting kicked off the telephone network? Just because the medium has evolved, the right of people to have access to common means of communication does not change.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been using the postal service to commit fraud for decades , but even repeat offenders are not banned from sending or receiving mail .
And when was the last time you heard of someone getting kicked off the telephone network ?
Just because the medium has evolved , the right of people to have access to common means of communication does not change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been using the postal service to commit fraud for decades, but even repeat offenders are not banned from sending or receiving mail.
And when was the last time you heard of someone getting kicked off the telephone network?
Just because the medium has evolved, the right of people to have access to common means of communication does not change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246</id>
	<title>If this was to pass</title>
	<author>future assassin</author>
	<datestamp>1266761700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll cancel my tv and interment accounts. I'll throw away all music and digital files I have bought over the years. I'll will never watch/buy another movie, buy/play another video game or buy/listen to music.</p><p>If a movement like this can be initiated with just 10\% of the population it'll hit those fucker in the pocket books really good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll cancel my tv and interment accounts .
I 'll throw away all music and digital files I have bought over the years .
I 'll will never watch/buy another movie , buy/play another video game or buy/listen to music.If a movement like this can be initiated with just 10 \ % of the population it 'll hit those fucker in the pocket books really good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll cancel my tv and interment accounts.
I'll throw away all music and digital files I have bought over the years.
I'll will never watch/buy another movie, buy/play another video game or buy/listen to music.If a movement like this can be initiated with just 10\% of the population it'll hit those fucker in the pocket books really good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227322</id>
	<title>In other words .. they OWN you!</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1266836100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... They <b>already</b> got all the money which you wanted to spend to them!</p><p>Do you really think they care less you are going to throw away all stuff you have bought with your own money in the first place?</p><p>Vote with your wallet in a more considerate way which will hurt them is the message here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because ... They already got all the money which you wanted to spend to them ! Do you really think they care less you are going to throw away all stuff you have bought with your own money in the first place ? Vote with your wallet in a more considerate way which will hurt them is the message here .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because ... They already got all the money which you wanted to spend to them!Do you really think they care less you are going to throw away all stuff you have bought with your own money in the first place?Vote with your wallet in a more considerate way which will hurt them is the message here ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31228102</id>
	<title>Re:First I wondered, how this could land in my spa</title>
	<author>secondhand\_Buddah</author>
	<datestamp>1266845460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If Steve jobs had his way, having an Apple appliance would be a mandatory requirement to access the internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Steve jobs had his way , having an Apple appliance would be a mandatory requirement to access the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Steve jobs had his way, having an Apple appliance would be a mandatory requirement to access the internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223410</id>
	<title>Re:This is absurd</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266755940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Secret, not secrete.  Secrete has a totally different word use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Secret , not secrete .
Secrete has a totally different word use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Secret, not secrete.
Secrete has a totally different word use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222932</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224656</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266764640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every citizen should participate in enforcing a "three strikes and you're out" rule for politicians, whereby after signing three stupid laws they would be forcibly expelled from the country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every citizen should participate in enforcing a " three strikes and you 're out " rule for politicians , whereby after signing three stupid laws they would be forcibly expelled from the country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every citizen should participate in enforcing a "three strikes and you're out" rule for politicians, whereby after signing three stupid laws they would be forcibly expelled from the country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226170</id>
	<title>Re:Treason, and terrorism</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope. It'll be known to us. Right after it gets signed. and even then, it won't really be advertised. Like every other law (except the cell phone laws), you have to go find out for yourself whether you're breaking it or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
It 'll be known to us .
Right after it gets signed .
and even then , it wo n't really be advertised .
Like every other law ( except the cell phone laws ) , you have to go find out for yourself whether you 're breaking it or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
It'll be known to us.
Right after it gets signed.
and even then, it won't really be advertised.
Like every other law (except the cell phone laws), you have to go find out for yourself whether you're breaking it or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</id>
	<title>So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>jr2k</author>
	<datestamp>1266753540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think I have posted 1 time since I opened am account here. This issue caused me to find my login<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/password.

This thing scares the shit out of me. Something that is seemingly "all encompassing" treaty for internet use should be out in the public for ridicule.

What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing? Or do we have no option? I am generally apathetic about internet policy because I have FIOS, but this treaty has changed my outlook.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I have posted 1 time since I opened am account here .
This issue caused me to find my login /password .
This thing scares the shit out of me .
Something that is seemingly " all encompassing " treaty for internet use should be out in the public for ridicule .
What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing ?
Or do we have no option ?
I am generally apathetic about internet policy because I have FIOS , but this treaty has changed my outlook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I have posted 1 time since I opened am account here.
This issue caused me to find my login /password.
This thing scares the shit out of me.
Something that is seemingly "all encompassing" treaty for internet use should be out in the public for ridicule.
What would be the due process for contacting whomever in government has the power to stop this thing?
Or do we have no option?
I am generally apathetic about internet policy because I have FIOS, but this treaty has changed my outlook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229676</id>
	<title>Re:The Furture</title>
	<author>KlaymenDK</author>
	<datestamp>1266856380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somebody needs to update "Epic" with this narrative! At least, that's the voice I naturally read it with.</p><p><a href="http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/" title="makingithappen.co.uk">http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/</a> [makingithappen.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody needs to update " Epic " with this narrative !
At least , that 's the voice I naturally read it with.http : //epic.makingithappen.co.uk/ [ makingithappen.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody needs to update "Epic" with this narrative!
At least, that's the voice I naturally read it with.http://epic.makingithappen.co.uk/ [makingithappen.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226648</id>
	<title>Corporations have more human rights than humans?</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1266868860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Make laws that prefer the rights of corporations over the rights of actual human beings. I don't see how this could possibly go wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Make laws that prefer the rights of corporations over the rights of actual human beings .
I do n't see how this could possibly go wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make laws that prefer the rights of corporations over the rights of actual human beings.
I don't see how this could possibly go wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223040</id>
	<title>Ex post facto?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will this be applied ex post facto (e.g., you copied an MP3 to your iPod some time ago, and once this gets passed you can be prosecuted, even after the statute of limitations is up?)</p><p>I'm asking as an American, FYI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will this be applied ex post facto ( e.g. , you copied an MP3 to your iPod some time ago , and once this gets passed you can be prosecuted , even after the statute of limitations is up ?
) I 'm asking as an American , FYI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will this be applied ex post facto (e.g., you copied an MP3 to your iPod some time ago, and once this gets passed you can be prosecuted, even after the statute of limitations is up?
)I'm asking as an American, FYI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227224</id>
	<title>Re:Law vs law?</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1266834840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, plus probably most governments constitutions.</p></div><p>Not in any constitutions passed recently. European constitution (a.k.a. Lissabon treaty) lacks any meaningful protections for freedom of speech, privacy and presumption of innocence. You know, the corporations have learned their lesson, and stopped putting such foolish clauses in.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights , plus probably most governments constitutions.Not in any constitutions passed recently .
European constitution ( a.k.a .
Lissabon treaty ) lacks any meaningful protections for freedom of speech , privacy and presumption of innocence .
You know , the corporations have learned their lesson , and stopped putting such foolish clauses in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And privacy is an human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, plus probably most governments constitutions.Not in any constitutions passed recently.
European constitution (a.k.a.
Lissabon treaty) lacks any meaningful protections for freedom of speech, privacy and presumption of innocence.
You know, the corporations have learned their lesson, and stopped putting such foolish clauses in.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224826</id>
	<title>Re:Why isn't China a Partner?</title>
	<author>introspekt.i</author>
	<datestamp>1266766140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Naturally this becomes an issue about race.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Naturally this becomes an issue about race .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Naturally this becomes an issue about race.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266760260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the United States a treaty has to be signed by the President and approved by two thirds of the Senate.  So you can:<ol>
<li>Convince the President not to sign it (he has been pushing for this treaty and has to sign it in order to repay his very favorable media coverage during the election).</li>
<li>Convince 34 senators to vote against it (they will be crucified by the media if they do so).  They will likely need to vote against it every year until the deadline runs out.</li>
<li>Convince two thirds of the states to hold a constitutional convention to fix copyright law.  Hope they come up a with a fair constitutional amendment.  Then convince three fourths of the states to ratify it.</li>
</ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the United States a treaty has to be signed by the President and approved by two thirds of the Senate .
So you can : Convince the President not to sign it ( he has been pushing for this treaty and has to sign it in order to repay his very favorable media coverage during the election ) .
Convince 34 senators to vote against it ( they will be crucified by the media if they do so ) .
They will likely need to vote against it every year until the deadline runs out .
Convince two thirds of the states to hold a constitutional convention to fix copyright law .
Hope they come up a with a fair constitutional amendment .
Then convince three fourths of the states to ratify it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the United States a treaty has to be signed by the President and approved by two thirds of the Senate.
So you can:
Convince the President not to sign it (he has been pushing for this treaty and has to sign it in order to repay his very favorable media coverage during the election).
Convince 34 senators to vote against it (they will be crucified by the media if they do so).
They will likely need to vote against it every year until the deadline runs out.
Convince two thirds of the states to hold a constitutional convention to fix copyright law.
Hope they come up a with a fair constitutional amendment.
Then convince three fourths of the states to ratify it.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222948</id>
	<title>Great...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Once ACTA gets implemented (which it no doubt will worldwide), it won't be long before the three strikes provisions are not only used to eliminate people Sony, EMI and Universal don't like, but those the government doesn't like as well. You'd better hope that you vote for the "right party" in the next election, or you may find you can't access the net one day...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Once ACTA gets implemented ( which it no doubt will worldwide ) , it wo n't be long before the three strikes provisions are not only used to eliminate people Sony , EMI and Universal do n't like , but those the government does n't like as well .
You 'd better hope that you vote for the " right party " in the next election , or you may find you ca n't access the net one day.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once ACTA gets implemented (which it no doubt will worldwide), it won't be long before the three strikes provisions are not only used to eliminate people Sony, EMI and Universal don't like, but those the government doesn't like as well.
You'd better hope that you vote for the "right party" in the next election, or you may find you can't access the net one day...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227656</id>
	<title>Re:If this was to pass</title>
	<author>Ogi\_UnixNut</author>
	<datestamp>1266840360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which will result in them blaming their losses on Piracy, probably demand a bailout, and followed by taxes/leves on the general populace and/or more crazy laws to "stop piracy". It's a self perpetuating cycle. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which will result in them blaming their losses on Piracy , probably demand a bailout , and followed by taxes/leves on the general populace and/or more crazy laws to " stop piracy " .
It 's a self perpetuating cycle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which will result in them blaming their losses on Piracy, probably demand a bailout, and followed by taxes/leves on the general populace and/or more crazy laws to "stop piracy".
It's a self perpetuating cycle. </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227354</id>
	<title>I wonder which dream comes out first ...</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1266836340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The nightmare of castles in the sky<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. or the dream of sky in our castles!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The nightmare of castles in the sky .. .. or the dream of sky in our castles !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The nightmare of castles in the sky .. .. or the dream of sky in our castles!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232796</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266866880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Republicrats and Democans are both bought out by the media conglomerate interests... Are you really going to be able to make any progress when they control the majority? And independents not swayed by party agendas are way too few.</p><p>I know of one party that has public-benefitting copyright reform as a goal, and that is the Pirate Party. Unfortunately, I only saw one person listed for Pirate Party in the U.S. - and good luck in Tennessee.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Republicrats and Democans are both bought out by the media conglomerate interests... Are you really going to be able to make any progress when they control the majority ?
And independents not swayed by party agendas are way too few.I know of one party that has public-benefitting copyright reform as a goal , and that is the Pirate Party .
Unfortunately , I only saw one person listed for Pirate Party in the U.S. - and good luck in Tennessee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Republicrats and Democans are both bought out by the media conglomerate interests... Are you really going to be able to make any progress when they control the majority?
And independents not swayed by party agendas are way too few.I know of one party that has public-benefitting copyright reform as a goal, and that is the Pirate Party.
Unfortunately, I only saw one person listed for Pirate Party in the U.S. - and good luck in Tennessee.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223320</id>
	<title>ISP Reason for Public Domain</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1266755280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this goes through here's what I'm going to do: make suggestions wherever there is a receptive venue to restore a functioning public domain.  If regulation such as this actually does go through and all those pipes (heheh) are suddenly sitting there underutilized, well, they need something else to fill them back up!  Starting with restoring a sane public domain would be a poetic way to accomplish this!  Say everything 20 years and older is the target to be public domain.  So, any movie, music, book, and software from 1990 and back right now.  ISP's who would suddenly be looking at a drought of demand for their infrastructure would probably be receptive to such a proposal.  Mom and Pop who suddenly found they couldn't download the latest pop song would also probably be receptive to the idea at least out of a sense of revenge.  Seriously if it's going to be class warfare then throw a little corporate warfare into the mix: pit ISP's against content industries.  At the very least I could be a little smug.  And if it doesn't work, get all your friends and family to move to the really cheap ISP plan which is all they'll actually and reasonably need in this new corporate dawn.  ISP's are the ones set to lose the biggest in this, all the more reason to give them ideas as much as possible.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this goes through here 's what I 'm going to do : make suggestions wherever there is a receptive venue to restore a functioning public domain .
If regulation such as this actually does go through and all those pipes ( heheh ) are suddenly sitting there underutilized , well , they need something else to fill them back up !
Starting with restoring a sane public domain would be a poetic way to accomplish this !
Say everything 20 years and older is the target to be public domain .
So , any movie , music , book , and software from 1990 and back right now .
ISP 's who would suddenly be looking at a drought of demand for their infrastructure would probably be receptive to such a proposal .
Mom and Pop who suddenly found they could n't download the latest pop song would also probably be receptive to the idea at least out of a sense of revenge .
Seriously if it 's going to be class warfare then throw a little corporate warfare into the mix : pit ISP 's against content industries .
At the very least I could be a little smug .
And if it does n't work , get all your friends and family to move to the really cheap ISP plan which is all they 'll actually and reasonably need in this new corporate dawn .
ISP 's are the ones set to lose the biggest in this , all the more reason to give them ideas as much as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this goes through here's what I'm going to do: make suggestions wherever there is a receptive venue to restore a functioning public domain.
If regulation such as this actually does go through and all those pipes (heheh) are suddenly sitting there underutilized, well, they need something else to fill them back up!
Starting with restoring a sane public domain would be a poetic way to accomplish this!
Say everything 20 years and older is the target to be public domain.
So, any movie, music, book, and software from 1990 and back right now.
ISP's who would suddenly be looking at a drought of demand for their infrastructure would probably be receptive to such a proposal.
Mom and Pop who suddenly found they couldn't download the latest pop song would also probably be receptive to the idea at least out of a sense of revenge.
Seriously if it's going to be class warfare then throw a little corporate warfare into the mix: pit ISP's against content industries.
At the very least I could be a little smug.
And if it doesn't work, get all your friends and family to move to the really cheap ISP plan which is all they'll actually and reasonably need in this new corporate dawn.
ISP's are the ones set to lose the biggest in this, all the more reason to give them ideas as much as possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225264</id>
	<title>Re:So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1266769020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?</p></div></blockquote><p>A good start would be to stop any pirating you may (or may not) be engaging in. Also, encourage your friends, neighbours, and relatives to do the same (be understanding, otherwise they'll feel attacked, and won't listen). Carefully explain that the best way to end this war, or at least people on our side, is to first take the moral high ground over these corporations (it may take a while). This way, we send the ball into their court. Will they continue to push for these ridiculous laws? If they don't back down gracefully, then suddenly it becomes all to apparent that their agenda was not preventing copyright infringement.</p><p>We are going to get this treaty, and the associated laws. The question is, can we prevent the <i>next</i> round of laws? And can we (eventually) redact some of the ones currently in play?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what can we ( US Citizens ) do to stop this ? A good start would be to stop any pirating you may ( or may not ) be engaging in .
Also , encourage your friends , neighbours , and relatives to do the same ( be understanding , otherwise they 'll feel attacked , and wo n't listen ) .
Carefully explain that the best way to end this war , or at least people on our side , is to first take the moral high ground over these corporations ( it may take a while ) .
This way , we send the ball into their court .
Will they continue to push for these ridiculous laws ?
If they do n't back down gracefully , then suddenly it becomes all to apparent that their agenda was not preventing copyright infringement.We are going to get this treaty , and the associated laws .
The question is , can we prevent the next round of laws ?
And can we ( eventually ) redact some of the ones currently in play ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what can we (US Citizens) do to stop this?A good start would be to stop any pirating you may (or may not) be engaging in.
Also, encourage your friends, neighbours, and relatives to do the same (be understanding, otherwise they'll feel attacked, and won't listen).
Carefully explain that the best way to end this war, or at least people on our side, is to first take the moral high ground over these corporations (it may take a while).
This way, we send the ball into their court.
Will they continue to push for these ridiculous laws?
If they don't back down gracefully, then suddenly it becomes all to apparent that their agenda was not preventing copyright infringement.We are going to get this treaty, and the associated laws.
The question is, can we prevent the next round of laws?
And can we (eventually) redact some of the ones currently in play?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224156</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266761220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.<br>- Benjamin Franklin</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security , deserve neither liberty or security.- Benjamin Franklin</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.- Benjamin Franklin</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223292</id>
	<title>Smoke and Mirrors...</title>
	<author>introspekt.i</author>
	<datestamp>1266755100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until it gets ratified by the Senate (for us US folk).  Write your senators, get the word out, take care of business.  If the entire thing stinks to high heaven, the politicians just need to be convinced by their constituents that it's important enough to be shot down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until it gets ratified by the Senate ( for us US folk ) .
Write your senators , get the word out , take care of business .
If the entire thing stinks to high heaven , the politicians just need to be convinced by their constituents that it 's important enough to be shot down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until it gets ratified by the Senate (for us US folk).
Write your senators, get the word out, take care of business.
If the entire thing stinks to high heaven, the politicians just need to be convinced by their constituents that it's important enough to be shot down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31239972</id>
	<title>Re:This is a MUCH bigger threat than terrorism.</title>
	<author>dweller\_below</author>
	<datestamp>1266853200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.</p><p>The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.</p></div><p>Whoever is doing this is focused on an immediate benefit. This is short-sighted thinking at it's finest. Open processes and democracy work because it directly benefits the law makers. When there is a bad/unpopular law, the guilt and blame gets spread around. It is pointless to kill the lawmakers, because they are everybody.</p><p>But, closed processes and secret lawmaking have an entirely different economy. It is obvious who to blame. Just get the list of people participating in the secret process. It is also obvious how to rectify that situation. And, in one or two quick steps we are back to the politics of the great merchant houses. The lawmakers end up being so unpopular that they can't go out or taste untested food. They lose almost as much freedom as the people they are enslaving.</p><p>It's not hard to see the big picture. It's obvious the end result is bad for everybody. What kind of short-term payoff could be so tempting?</p><p>Miles</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish I could attribute the saying , but here is how I 've heard it said : If your law requires a police state to enforce , then your law is a bad law.The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.Whoever is doing this is focused on an immediate benefit .
This is short-sighted thinking at it 's finest .
Open processes and democracy work because it directly benefits the law makers .
When there is a bad/unpopular law , the guilt and blame gets spread around .
It is pointless to kill the lawmakers , because they are everybody.But , closed processes and secret lawmaking have an entirely different economy .
It is obvious who to blame .
Just get the list of people participating in the secret process .
It is also obvious how to rectify that situation .
And , in one or two quick steps we are back to the politics of the great merchant houses .
The lawmakers end up being so unpopular that they ca n't go out or taste untested food .
They lose almost as much freedom as the people they are enslaving.It 's not hard to see the big picture .
It 's obvious the end result is bad for everybody .
What kind of short-term payoff could be so tempting ? Miles</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish I could attribute the saying, but here is how I've heard it said:  If your law requires a police state to enforce, then your law is a bad law.The very fact that these meetings were held in secret was a dead giveaway that nothing in our interests is going on in there.Whoever is doing this is focused on an immediate benefit.
This is short-sighted thinking at it's finest.
Open processes and democracy work because it directly benefits the law makers.
When there is a bad/unpopular law, the guilt and blame gets spread around.
It is pointless to kill the lawmakers, because they are everybody.But, closed processes and secret lawmaking have an entirely different economy.
It is obvious who to blame.
Just get the list of people participating in the secret process.
It is also obvious how to rectify that situation.
And, in one or two quick steps we are back to the politics of the great merchant houses.
The lawmakers end up being so unpopular that they can't go out or taste untested food.
They lose almost as much freedom as the people they are enslaving.It's not hard to see the big picture.
It's obvious the end result is bad for everybody.
What kind of short-term payoff could be so tempting?Miles
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31234790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31239972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31228102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31230598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2136238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223208
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31228102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224156
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226780
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224024
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224916
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31239972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223410
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225866
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31232796
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31222928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31234790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224896
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31230598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31225498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224196
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31226172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31227098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31233148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31224886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31229636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223242
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2136238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2136238.31223084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
