<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_05_027258</id>
	<title>Ubisoft's New DRM Cracked In One Day</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1267801080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Colonel Korn writes <i>"Ubisoft's recent announcement that upcoming games would require a constant internet connection in order to play has been discussed at length on Slashdot (<a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/02/27/163226/The-Awful-Anti-Pirate-System-That-Will-Probably-Work">'The Awful Anti-Pirate System That Will Probably Work'</a>).  Many were of the opinion that this new, more demanding DRM would have effectiveness to match its inconvenience, at least financially justifying its use.  Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked, as is usually the case, leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates.  As usual, the latter group was right.  Though Ubisoft won't yet admit it, Skid-Row <a href="http://www.infoaddict.com/ubisofts-new-drm-cracked-in-under-25-hours">managed to crack the new DRM</a> less than a day after it was first released."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Colonel Korn writes " Ubisoft 's recent announcement that upcoming games would require a constant internet connection in order to play has been discussed at length on Slashdot ( 'The Awful Anti-Pirate System That Will Probably Work ' ) .
Many were of the opinion that this new , more demanding DRM would have effectiveness to match its inconvenience , at least financially justifying its use .
Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked , as is usually the case , leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates .
As usual , the latter group was right .
Though Ubisoft wo n't yet admit it , Skid-Row managed to crack the new DRM less than a day after it was first released .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Colonel Korn writes "Ubisoft's recent announcement that upcoming games would require a constant internet connection in order to play has been discussed at length on Slashdot ('The Awful Anti-Pirate System That Will Probably Work').
Many were of the opinion that this new, more demanding DRM would have effectiveness to match its inconvenience, at least financially justifying its use.
Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked, as is usually the case, leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates.
As usual, the latter group was right.
Though Ubisoft won't yet admit it, Skid-Row managed to crack the new DRM less than a day after it was first released.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370976</id>
	<title>Echo that</title>
	<author>QuaveringGrape</author>
	<datestamp>1267804680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are lots of game companies that don't use DRM...and what's more they have come out and made a point of it. Examples: <a href="http://www.wolfire.com/" title="wolfire.com" rel="nofollow">Wolfire</a> [wolfire.com], <a href="http://www.2dboy.com/" title="2dboy.com" rel="nofollow">2dBoy</a> [2dboy.com], and <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/" title="unknownworlds.com" rel="nofollow">Unknown worlds</a> [unknownworlds.com], just to name a few.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are lots of game companies that do n't use DRM...and what 's more they have come out and made a point of it .
Examples : Wolfire [ wolfire.com ] , 2dBoy [ 2dboy.com ] , and Unknown worlds [ unknownworlds.com ] , just to name a few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are lots of game companies that don't use DRM...and what's more they have come out and made a point of it.
Examples: Wolfire [wolfire.com], 2dBoy [2dboy.com], and Unknown worlds [unknownworlds.com], just to name a few.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560</id>
	<title>Ubisoft hates Troops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>And others with limited connectivity.  I hope this DRM fails and fails hard, if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer (not consumer).</htmltext>
<tokenext>And others with limited connectivity .
I hope this DRM fails and fails hard , if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer ( not consumer ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And others with limited connectivity.
I hope this DRM fails and fails hard, if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer (not consumer).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368768</id>
	<title>Re:You must know what this will cause right?</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1267784280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Protect" their property by devaluing it? Yes, devalue. What's the value of a product? By its definition what someone else is willing (and able) to pay for it. No product has an intrinsic value. They have manufacturing cost, but that does not equal their value. I could make a table of pure gold with a manufacturing value of a few million, if not billion, USD, but I doubt I'd find anyone stupid enough to buy it. It does not represent this value.</p><p>So value is dependent entirely on the buyer's esteem of the product. And a game that limits me more than a game of equal properties (in this case, the original compared to the cracked game) is less valuable.</p><p>So, essentially, DRM means you increase the cost of manufacturing (actually, DRM, since you pay at a per-unit base, is about the ONLY major cost in a game that depends on the units produced/sold, most of the rest of your costs are unit-independent) to lower the value of your product.</p><p>I dunno, I am no MBA, but I know that much about business that INCREASING your cost to LOWER the value of your product is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... umm, stupid?</p><p>If anything kills PC gaming it's the trend to spend more and more money on things that drive away more and more paying customers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Protect " their property by devaluing it ?
Yes , devalue .
What 's the value of a product ?
By its definition what someone else is willing ( and able ) to pay for it .
No product has an intrinsic value .
They have manufacturing cost , but that does not equal their value .
I could make a table of pure gold with a manufacturing value of a few million , if not billion , USD , but I doubt I 'd find anyone stupid enough to buy it .
It does not represent this value.So value is dependent entirely on the buyer 's esteem of the product .
And a game that limits me more than a game of equal properties ( in this case , the original compared to the cracked game ) is less valuable.So , essentially , DRM means you increase the cost of manufacturing ( actually , DRM , since you pay at a per-unit base , is about the ONLY major cost in a game that depends on the units produced/sold , most of the rest of your costs are unit-independent ) to lower the value of your product.I dunno , I am no MBA , but I know that much about business that INCREASING your cost to LOWER the value of your product is ... umm , stupid ? If anything kills PC gaming it 's the trend to spend more and more money on things that drive away more and more paying customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Protect" their property by devaluing it?
Yes, devalue.
What's the value of a product?
By its definition what someone else is willing (and able) to pay for it.
No product has an intrinsic value.
They have manufacturing cost, but that does not equal their value.
I could make a table of pure gold with a manufacturing value of a few million, if not billion, USD, but I doubt I'd find anyone stupid enough to buy it.
It does not represent this value.So value is dependent entirely on the buyer's esteem of the product.
And a game that limits me more than a game of equal properties (in this case, the original compared to the cracked game) is less valuable.So, essentially, DRM means you increase the cost of manufacturing (actually, DRM, since you pay at a per-unit base, is about the ONLY major cost in a game that depends on the units produced/sold, most of the rest of your costs are unit-independent) to lower the value of your product.I dunno, I am no MBA, but I know that much about business that INCREASING your cost to LOWER the value of your product is ... umm, stupid?If anything kills PC gaming it's the trend to spend more and more money on things that drive away more and more paying customers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367288</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>DMalic</author>
	<datestamp>1267724220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>- no-one sane is advocating for removal of online authentication, which actually works
- a basic check to keep people from simply copying CDs can be helpful

Forget the people who torrent; they're too hard to stop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>- no-one sane is advocating for removal of online authentication , which actually works - a basic check to keep people from simply copying CDs can be helpful Forget the people who torrent ; they 're too hard to stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- no-one sane is advocating for removal of online authentication, which actually works
- a basic check to keep people from simply copying CDs can be helpful

Forget the people who torrent; they're too hard to stop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367838</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that says</p></div><p>Isn't something similar part of OS X copy protection? Text within a kernel module or something such. Can't understand how I can't find it using Google.</p><p>This post won't earn me any credits =P, the actual text would had<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that saysIs n't something similar part of OS X copy protection ?
Text within a kernel module or something such .
Ca n't understand how I ca n't find it using Google.This post wo n't earn me any credits = P , the actual text would had : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that saysIsn't something similar part of OS X copy protection?
Text within a kernel module or something such.
Can't understand how I can't find it using Google.This post won't earn me any credits =P, the actual text would had :D
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366938</id>
	<title>fuck you Ubisoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267721760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was excited about Assassin's Creed 2 until information about its DRM showed up.  Steam describes it as: "Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times."</p><p>Fuck that shit.  I haven't pirated a game in over three years (since I got out of college and have money to spend) and have purchased several of Ubusoft's games over the years: Assassin's Creed 1, Beyond Good and Evil, Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway, Far Cry 2 (I don't care what anyone says -- this one kicked ass), and a couple of the Splinter Cells.  I'm sympathetic to the desire to limit software piracy -- software development isn't cheap and games can be risky -- but here is one almost guaranteed sale that you've fucked up, Ubusoft.  I'd still like to play the game, but I definitely can't, in good conscience, allow my money to make this sort of shit look successful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was excited about Assassin 's Creed 2 until information about its DRM showed up .
Steam describes it as : " Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times .
" Fuck that shit .
I have n't pirated a game in over three years ( since I got out of college and have money to spend ) and have purchased several of Ubusoft 's games over the years : Assassin 's Creed 1 , Beyond Good and Evil , Brothers in Arms : Hell 's Highway , Far Cry 2 ( I do n't care what anyone says -- this one kicked ass ) , and a couple of the Splinter Cells .
I 'm sympathetic to the desire to limit software piracy -- software development is n't cheap and games can be risky -- but here is one almost guaranteed sale that you 've fucked up , Ubusoft .
I 'd still like to play the game , but I definitely ca n't , in good conscience , allow my money to make this sort of shit look successful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was excited about Assassin's Creed 2 until information about its DRM showed up.
Steam describes it as: "Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times.
"Fuck that shit.
I haven't pirated a game in over three years (since I got out of college and have money to spend) and have purchased several of Ubusoft's games over the years: Assassin's Creed 1, Beyond Good and Evil, Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway, Far Cry 2 (I don't care what anyone says -- this one kicked ass), and a couple of the Splinter Cells.
I'm sympathetic to the desire to limit software piracy -- software development isn't cheap and games can be risky -- but here is one almost guaranteed sale that you've fucked up, Ubusoft.
I'd still like to play the game, but I definitely can't, in good conscience, allow my money to make this sort of shit look successful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367366</id>
	<title>I wonder</title>
	<author>wisnoskij</author>
	<datestamp>1267724820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is it just far far harder to try to protect from piracy then it is to crack, or is Skid-Row just more talented then their employees.</p><p>I understand anything is crackable, but this 1 day cracking that happens most of the time is just excessively quick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is it just far far harder to try to protect from piracy then it is to crack , or is Skid-Row just more talented then their employees.I understand anything is crackable , but this 1 day cracking that happens most of the time is just excessively quick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is it just far far harder to try to protect from piracy then it is to crack, or is Skid-Row just more talented then their employees.I understand anything is crackable, but this 1 day cracking that happens most of the time is just excessively quick.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372946</id>
	<title>Re:Off topic, but fundamental to the discussion...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1267814100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really fundamental to the discussion.  It's like asking 'if a cheap consumer-grade CPU could execute NP-complete algorithms in a few seconds on any input data, would you still recommend RSA?'  The DRM system that you propose is not just difficult, it is not even theoretically possible.  In logic, this kind of argument is called ex falsio quodlibet, meaning that if you start with a false axiom you can derive any statement as true.  </p><p>
So, to answer your question, if there were a herd of unicorns grazing in the churchyard across the road, then yes I would be in favour of DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really fundamental to the discussion .
It 's like asking 'if a cheap consumer-grade CPU could execute NP-complete algorithms in a few seconds on any input data , would you still recommend RSA ?
' The DRM system that you propose is not just difficult , it is not even theoretically possible .
In logic , this kind of argument is called ex falsio quodlibet , meaning that if you start with a false axiom you can derive any statement as true .
So , to answer your question , if there were a herd of unicorns grazing in the churchyard across the road , then yes I would be in favour of DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really fundamental to the discussion.
It's like asking 'if a cheap consumer-grade CPU could execute NP-complete algorithms in a few seconds on any input data, would you still recommend RSA?
'  The DRM system that you propose is not just difficult, it is not even theoretically possible.
In logic, this kind of argument is called ex falsio quodlibet, meaning that if you start with a false axiom you can derive any statement as true.
So, to answer your question, if there were a herd of unicorns grazing in the churchyard across the road, then yes I would be in favour of DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368514</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267781100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... they are to stop software theft, they're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... </p></div><p>That's called innovation: trying to be better than the rest.</p><p>I'd give them the benefit of a doubt and say this DRR project wasn't a total failure and has been designed to be extendable. Maybe this was just the first iteration of restrictions the system is capable of.</p><p>If I had any say in such an always-online system, I'd design it with the goal to one day move to server-based single player games, i.e. games that run crucial code - that never makes it to the client - on the publisher's server. If you already require a constant connection, that's only logical.</p><p>Or maybe their marketing has shown that the majority of people won't mind such a system and created a cheap throw-away system for the massive attention they get.</p><p>PS:<br>OMGWTF piracy is not theftz0rz!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... they are to stop software theft , they 're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet ... That 's called innovation : trying to be better than the rest.I 'd give them the benefit of a doubt and say this DRR project was n't a total failure and has been designed to be extendable .
Maybe this was just the first iteration of restrictions the system is capable of.If I had any say in such an always-online system , I 'd design it with the goal to one day move to server-based single player games , i.e .
games that run crucial code - that never makes it to the client - on the publisher 's server .
If you already require a constant connection , that 's only logical.Or maybe their marketing has shown that the majority of people wo n't mind such a system and created a cheap throw-away system for the massive attention they get.PS : OMGWTF piracy is not theftz0rz !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... they are to stop software theft, they're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet ... That's called innovation: trying to be better than the rest.I'd give them the benefit of a doubt and say this DRR project wasn't a total failure and has been designed to be extendable.
Maybe this was just the first iteration of restrictions the system is capable of.If I had any say in such an always-online system, I'd design it with the goal to one day move to server-based single player games, i.e.
games that run crucial code - that never makes it to the client - on the publisher's server.
If you already require a constant connection, that's only logical.Or maybe their marketing has shown that the majority of people won't mind such a system and created a cheap throw-away system for the massive attention they get.PS:OMGWTF piracy is not theftz0rz!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370928</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267804440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except, I'm sure they will chalk most lost sales up to the pirates anyway, and feel the need to implement even more DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except , I 'm sure they will chalk most lost sales up to the pirates anyway , and feel the need to implement even more DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except, I'm sure they will chalk most lost sales up to the pirates anyway, and feel the need to implement even more DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369528</id>
	<title>Re:So was Sony stupid for implementing DRM in the</title>
	<author>andydread</author>
	<datestamp>1267794060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Woops!  Sony got their arse handed to them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Woops !
Sony got their arse handed to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Woops!
Sony got their arse handed to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368614</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1267782240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or to give a more simple reason why DRM doesn't generally work, PCs are open systems, the content has to become available to the system at some point whether it's encrypted, or sent across the network. It still has to end up on a system whose memory and executable code at run time can be peeked and poked at will.</p><p>The only real workaround is to process some game logic and such server side, but that is going to cost the company a lot in terms of processing power, a lot in terms of bandwidth, a lot in terms of additional development effort, but perhaps, a lot of embarassment when said servers fail and the game keels over for a few days.</p><p>DRM is pretty much a lost cause from the off, it's not that it requires too high a degree of developer skill to implement properly, it's simply that it really can't be implemented properly, at least, not without massive extra cost to the company that would likely outweigh any profits the game will make, and not without severe detriment to the game experience.</p><p>Really, it doesn't matter if you had some god like developer that could implement a DRM scheme without making a single mistake, it'd still be a DRM system designed to run on an open system at the end of the day and would hence still be inherently vulnerable. DRM basically tries to say "You can't do this", except it's saying it on a system where you can anyway, and where that can overrides the can't because the user gets priority over control of the system, not the DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or to give a more simple reason why DRM does n't generally work , PCs are open systems , the content has to become available to the system at some point whether it 's encrypted , or sent across the network .
It still has to end up on a system whose memory and executable code at run time can be peeked and poked at will.The only real workaround is to process some game logic and such server side , but that is going to cost the company a lot in terms of processing power , a lot in terms of bandwidth , a lot in terms of additional development effort , but perhaps , a lot of embarassment when said servers fail and the game keels over for a few days.DRM is pretty much a lost cause from the off , it 's not that it requires too high a degree of developer skill to implement properly , it 's simply that it really ca n't be implemented properly , at least , not without massive extra cost to the company that would likely outweigh any profits the game will make , and not without severe detriment to the game experience.Really , it does n't matter if you had some god like developer that could implement a DRM scheme without making a single mistake , it 'd still be a DRM system designed to run on an open system at the end of the day and would hence still be inherently vulnerable .
DRM basically tries to say " You ca n't do this " , except it 's saying it on a system where you can anyway , and where that can overrides the ca n't because the user gets priority over control of the system , not the DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or to give a more simple reason why DRM doesn't generally work, PCs are open systems, the content has to become available to the system at some point whether it's encrypted, or sent across the network.
It still has to end up on a system whose memory and executable code at run time can be peeked and poked at will.The only real workaround is to process some game logic and such server side, but that is going to cost the company a lot in terms of processing power, a lot in terms of bandwidth, a lot in terms of additional development effort, but perhaps, a lot of embarassment when said servers fail and the game keels over for a few days.DRM is pretty much a lost cause from the off, it's not that it requires too high a degree of developer skill to implement properly, it's simply that it really can't be implemented properly, at least, not without massive extra cost to the company that would likely outweigh any profits the game will make, and not without severe detriment to the game experience.Really, it doesn't matter if you had some god like developer that could implement a DRM scheme without making a single mistake, it'd still be a DRM system designed to run on an open system at the end of the day and would hence still be inherently vulnerable.
DRM basically tries to say "You can't do this", except it's saying it on a system where you can anyway, and where that can overrides the can't because the user gets priority over control of the system, not the DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373658</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then why bother increasing the complexity of DRM?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then why bother increasing the complexity of DRM ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then why bother increasing the complexity of DRM?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369322</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267791360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are wrong. The assholes at Skidrow, Paradox and Razor1911 are not brilliant, they just have a debugger, asm skills and unlimited amount of time. Cracking a game is not rocket science, anybody can do it.

This was the perfect opportunity for consumers to vote with your wallet. Instead the retards from the warez scene cracked the game and now Ubisoft will think twice before wasting money and time making PC games. Soon other publishers will follow and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye. So you can thank those assholes in the warez groups for killing PC gaming, like they did with the Amiga back in the day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong .
The assholes at Skidrow , Paradox and Razor1911 are not brilliant , they just have a debugger , asm skills and unlimited amount of time .
Cracking a game is not rocket science , anybody can do it .
This was the perfect opportunity for consumers to vote with your wallet .
Instead the retards from the warez scene cracked the game and now Ubisoft will think twice before wasting money and time making PC games .
Soon other publishers will follow and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye .
So you can thank those assholes in the warez groups for killing PC gaming , like they did with the Amiga back in the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong.
The assholes at Skidrow, Paradox and Razor1911 are not brilliant, they just have a debugger, asm skills and unlimited amount of time.
Cracking a game is not rocket science, anybody can do it.
This was the perfect opportunity for consumers to vote with your wallet.
Instead the retards from the warez scene cracked the game and now Ubisoft will think twice before wasting money and time making PC games.
Soon other publishers will follow and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye.
So you can thank those assholes in the warez groups for killing PC gaming, like they did with the Amiga back in the day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366614</id>
	<title>Seriously</title>
	<author>blackholepcs</author>
	<datestamp>1267719540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did no one see this coming? Every time one of these customer-raping companies says they have achieved new levels of DRM-Uncrackableness, they are proven wrong within 24 hours. How stupid are these people to continue to waste millions of dollars trying to secure their software from being pirated, only to have their efforts shown for naught within a day, three days at the most? And how do they not fucking understand that all they are truly doing is pissing off customers and running their company name into the ground? Every time I hear about a company pulling this crap I get more disgusted with software companies. Oh, I know they have a right to protect their properties and profits and all that jazz. But, damnit, consumers have a right to expect a certain level of quality and usability WITHOUT draconian restrictions and double talk and non-ownership-of-a-product-you-paid-to-own type bullshit. This is EXACTLY the reason I choose to pirate a large amount of the games I play. I paid for Mass Effect because of the outstanding (to me) gameplay and story/graphics. Same goes for Dragon Age : Origins, The Witcher, Boderlands, and Divinity II : Ego Draconis. Yes, there is a bit of DRM to those games, but it isn't anywere near as retarded, insulting, lame, fucked up, and basically fucking illegal (or at least it SHOULD be illegal) as forcing me to be connected to the internet to play a god damned single player game that, other than the fucking DRM, has abso-fucking-lutley no reason to connect to the internet. Fuck Ubi and I hope with all seriuosness that Assassin's Creed 2 gets cracked and becomes the most pirated game in history while simultaneously becoming the biggest financial failure in the history of video games. Maybe then these companies will stop with the DRM and find a mutally agreeable way to protect their work without screwing over their customers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did no one see this coming ?
Every time one of these customer-raping companies says they have achieved new levels of DRM-Uncrackableness , they are proven wrong within 24 hours .
How stupid are these people to continue to waste millions of dollars trying to secure their software from being pirated , only to have their efforts shown for naught within a day , three days at the most ?
And how do they not fucking understand that all they are truly doing is pissing off customers and running their company name into the ground ?
Every time I hear about a company pulling this crap I get more disgusted with software companies .
Oh , I know they have a right to protect their properties and profits and all that jazz .
But , damnit , consumers have a right to expect a certain level of quality and usability WITHOUT draconian restrictions and double talk and non-ownership-of-a-product-you-paid-to-own type bullshit .
This is EXACTLY the reason I choose to pirate a large amount of the games I play .
I paid for Mass Effect because of the outstanding ( to me ) gameplay and story/graphics .
Same goes for Dragon Age : Origins , The Witcher , Boderlands , and Divinity II : Ego Draconis .
Yes , there is a bit of DRM to those games , but it is n't anywere near as retarded , insulting , lame , fucked up , and basically fucking illegal ( or at least it SHOULD be illegal ) as forcing me to be connected to the internet to play a god damned single player game that , other than the fucking DRM , has abso-fucking-lutley no reason to connect to the internet .
Fuck Ubi and I hope with all seriuosness that Assassin 's Creed 2 gets cracked and becomes the most pirated game in history while simultaneously becoming the biggest financial failure in the history of video games .
Maybe then these companies will stop with the DRM and find a mutally agreeable way to protect their work without screwing over their customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did no one see this coming?
Every time one of these customer-raping companies says they have achieved new levels of DRM-Uncrackableness, they are proven wrong within 24 hours.
How stupid are these people to continue to waste millions of dollars trying to secure their software from being pirated, only to have their efforts shown for naught within a day, three days at the most?
And how do they not fucking understand that all they are truly doing is pissing off customers and running their company name into the ground?
Every time I hear about a company pulling this crap I get more disgusted with software companies.
Oh, I know they have a right to protect their properties and profits and all that jazz.
But, damnit, consumers have a right to expect a certain level of quality and usability WITHOUT draconian restrictions and double talk and non-ownership-of-a-product-you-paid-to-own type bullshit.
This is EXACTLY the reason I choose to pirate a large amount of the games I play.
I paid for Mass Effect because of the outstanding (to me) gameplay and story/graphics.
Same goes for Dragon Age : Origins, The Witcher, Boderlands, and Divinity II : Ego Draconis.
Yes, there is a bit of DRM to those games, but it isn't anywere near as retarded, insulting, lame, fucked up, and basically fucking illegal (or at least it SHOULD be illegal) as forcing me to be connected to the internet to play a god damned single player game that, other than the fucking DRM, has abso-fucking-lutley no reason to connect to the internet.
Fuck Ubi and I hope with all seriuosness that Assassin's Creed 2 gets cracked and becomes the most pirated game in history while simultaneously becoming the biggest financial failure in the history of video games.
Maybe then these companies will stop with the DRM and find a mutally agreeable way to protect their work without screwing over their customers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367476</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267725900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It'd be cracked on day one and people would be angry at the company for stopping payments, not so much the (mostly anonymous) pirates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'd be cracked on day one and people would be angry at the company for stopping payments , not so much the ( mostly anonymous ) pirates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'd be cracked on day one and people would be angry at the company for stopping payments, not so much the (mostly anonymous) pirates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367052</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>hardburn</author>
	<datestamp>1267722480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.</p></div><p>No, I think we just <i>hope</i> they get buried for their crummy DRM. They'll probably make a heap of cash, anyway.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games. Users are lazy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack</p></div><p>That argument works both ways; with really intrusive DRM systems, it's often easier to use a pirated version.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft is n't going to make much money on the game.No , I think we just hope they get buried for their crummy DRM .
They 'll probably make a heap of cash , anyway.I 'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked , maybe even quickly - but they 'll still make good money from these games .
Users are lazy ... many are n't willing to troll warez sites to find the crackThat argument works both ways ; with really intrusive DRM systems , it 's often easier to use a pirated version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.No, I think we just hope they get buried for their crummy DRM.
They'll probably make a heap of cash, anyway.I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games.
Users are lazy ... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crackThat argument works both ways; with really intrusive DRM systems, it's often easier to use a pirated version.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367006</id>
	<title>snake oil salesmen rake in the cash again</title>
	<author>hAckz0r</author>
	<datestamp>1267722180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>While you said<blockquote><div><p>guaranteed to be cracked</p></div></blockquote><p>

in jest (that humor itself is priceless), I certainly could not agree more. The reality of DRM is that the whole concept is flawed, by the logic alone. In that you have to give the user everything they need to run the app, or listen/watch to the media, so what is there to prevent someone skilled with IDA Pro from making it work for their own purposes after the DRM manages to sufficiently piss them off? So, you there you sit, you have the key, you have the data/code/bitstream, and you have the algorithm. Nothing prevents you from hacking apart the code and putting those three pieces back together in a different way other than what was intended, except for a few badly written laws like the DMCA. That's not a prevention, it's just a social mechanism that just serves to make the hackers self-righteous in their own mind, and therefore even 'more likely' to feel justified in 'getting back' at 'the bad-guys' (not my frame of mind, but its out there). </p><p>

The sad thing is that <b>with the use of DRM everyone looses, EXCEPT for the one peddling DRM</b> as the 'answer to everything'. It's not. Reality could not be further from the truth. Yet these modern-day snake oil salesmen always manage to walk off with millions of dollars in their pockets while everyone else, including the owner of the copyrighted media being 'protected', get the shaft. It only hurts the owners bottom line, stiffs the purchaser who can't use the product, and the snake oil salesman lives in a big mansion somewhere on a hill. What is wrong with this picture? What we need is a new set of laws to protect us from snake oil salesmen, in that if you promise your product is going to do XYZ then you should not be legally shielded by some EULA when you promise something that is known by real experts to not be true. Selling a 'solution' under false pretences is the way I see it. If you sell snake oil you should pay the price. </p><p>

btw - If you honestly believe that DRM can actually work, then <i>Have I got a bridge for you!!...</i> </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While you saidguaranteed to be cracked in jest ( that humor itself is priceless ) , I certainly could not agree more .
The reality of DRM is that the whole concept is flawed , by the logic alone .
In that you have to give the user everything they need to run the app , or listen/watch to the media , so what is there to prevent someone skilled with IDA Pro from making it work for their own purposes after the DRM manages to sufficiently piss them off ?
So , you there you sit , you have the key , you have the data/code/bitstream , and you have the algorithm .
Nothing prevents you from hacking apart the code and putting those three pieces back together in a different way other than what was intended , except for a few badly written laws like the DMCA .
That 's not a prevention , it 's just a social mechanism that just serves to make the hackers self-righteous in their own mind , and therefore even 'more likely ' to feel justified in 'getting back ' at 'the bad-guys ' ( not my frame of mind , but its out there ) .
The sad thing is that with the use of DRM everyone looses , EXCEPT for the one peddling DRM as the 'answer to everything' .
It 's not .
Reality could not be further from the truth .
Yet these modern-day snake oil salesmen always manage to walk off with millions of dollars in their pockets while everyone else , including the owner of the copyrighted media being 'protected ' , get the shaft .
It only hurts the owners bottom line , stiffs the purchaser who ca n't use the product , and the snake oil salesman lives in a big mansion somewhere on a hill .
What is wrong with this picture ?
What we need is a new set of laws to protect us from snake oil salesmen , in that if you promise your product is going to do XYZ then you should not be legally shielded by some EULA when you promise something that is known by real experts to not be true .
Selling a 'solution ' under false pretences is the way I see it .
If you sell snake oil you should pay the price .
btw - If you honestly believe that DRM can actually work , then Have I got a bridge for you !
! .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you saidguaranteed to be cracked

in jest (that humor itself is priceless), I certainly could not agree more.
The reality of DRM is that the whole concept is flawed, by the logic alone.
In that you have to give the user everything they need to run the app, or listen/watch to the media, so what is there to prevent someone skilled with IDA Pro from making it work for their own purposes after the DRM manages to sufficiently piss them off?
So, you there you sit, you have the key, you have the data/code/bitstream, and you have the algorithm.
Nothing prevents you from hacking apart the code and putting those three pieces back together in a different way other than what was intended, except for a few badly written laws like the DMCA.
That's not a prevention, it's just a social mechanism that just serves to make the hackers self-righteous in their own mind, and therefore even 'more likely' to feel justified in 'getting back' at 'the bad-guys' (not my frame of mind, but its out there).
The sad thing is that with the use of DRM everyone looses, EXCEPT for the one peddling DRM as the 'answer to everything'.
It's not.
Reality could not be further from the truth.
Yet these modern-day snake oil salesmen always manage to walk off with millions of dollars in their pockets while everyone else, including the owner of the copyrighted media being 'protected', get the shaft.
It only hurts the owners bottom line, stiffs the purchaser who can't use the product, and the snake oil salesman lives in a big mansion somewhere on a hill.
What is wrong with this picture?
What we need is a new set of laws to protect us from snake oil salesmen, in that if you promise your product is going to do XYZ then you should not be legally shielded by some EULA when you promise something that is known by real experts to not be true.
Selling a 'solution' under false pretences is the way I see it.
If you sell snake oil you should pay the price.
btw - If you honestly believe that DRM can actually work, then Have I got a bridge for you!
!... 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375078</id>
	<title>C'mon Slashdot!</title>
	<author>Joe Snipe</author>
	<datestamp>1267780860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not one technical account of how it was cracked? Are we not nerds?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not one technical account of how it was cracked ?
Are we not nerds ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not one technical account of how it was cracked?
Are we not nerds?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368914</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267786380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This almost makes me wonder, has any groups over the years of gaming reverse engineered the server-side structures of the code that runs the game servers?<br>It shouldn't be too hard, correct?<br>All you do is create a game server with every possible unique combination with a bunch of friends and watch all server-client messages, then recreate what goes on it the middle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This almost makes me wonder , has any groups over the years of gaming reverse engineered the server-side structures of the code that runs the game servers ? It should n't be too hard , correct ? All you do is create a game server with every possible unique combination with a bunch of friends and watch all server-client messages , then recreate what goes on it the middle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This almost makes me wonder, has any groups over the years of gaming reverse engineered the server-side structures of the code that runs the game servers?It shouldn't be too hard, correct?All you do is create a game server with every possible unique combination with a bunch of friends and watch all server-client messages, then recreate what goes on it the middle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367246</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1267723920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any. Pirating is far too widespread.</p></div><p>You do realize, I hope, that DRM also doesn't stop piracy, and the only thing DRM offers to the paying customer is envy that the pirates are enjoying a better playing experience than we are.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Pirates blame the developers for using DRM,</p></div><p>Pirates blame no one, they just pirate the game.  They laugh at DRM.  They break it within days of its release, and do their thing.  Their thing is wrong.  It is not prevented in any way by DRM.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers</p></div><p>Agreed.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>yet the pirates are the one to blame.</p></div><p>I'd agree, except for the absolute and utter proof that DRM has no effect on large-scale or even for the most part casual piracy.  DRM prevents someone who does not want to break the law from breaking the law, but in general the people who are affected by DRM are the ones who want to pay for what we use.  DRM is a sign on the door of a house saying "ON VACATION FOR A MONTH, LOCK BROKEN, PLEASE DON'T ROB ME".  The honest people wouldn't have anyway, and the thieves aren't hampered by it.</p><p>The only thing DRM prevents is backups by people who have paid for their copies and don't want to break the law, or "home piracy" (someone buys one copy and wants to use it on multiple computers, etc).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Stop trying to spin the argument, pirates.</p></div><p>Simple facts.  No spin.  I have purchased each and every game I've ever played.  I also quickly developed the habit of downloading the pirated version of the game to actually play it, because I've had games fail because my DVD drive was too old or too new (Ubisoft, I'm looking straight at you), or because of conflicting DRM schemes that break each other.  I've also been reluctant to take my $50-75 original CDs that may not be backed up to a LAN party where they are subject to damage.</p><p>The ONLY reason I used to pay for games is because I feel it's important to compensate the studios for their hard work and efforts.  But I pirate copies of them afterward because I want to be able to use what I paid for, and I can't afford to keep swapping DVD drives out because one game doesn't like the presence of one drive, and the other game doesn't like the presence of the only drive the one game will run on, or the installation of a game puts on SecuROM that fucks up my drive for running another DRM scheme, or any one of a number of problems I have run into.  I've had to completely reload XP twice (and reactivate that) just to undo the damage done by DRM schemes.</p><p>After a while, I just got sick of it.  I stopped buying games.  I don't pirate them, either.  I just don't play any more.  It's not fun any more, when something that is intended to entertain requires that I turn pirate or risk the operation of the rest of my computer.  I don't even play the $750 in games I have purchased any more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any .
Pirating is far too widespread.You do realize , I hope , that DRM also does n't stop piracy , and the only thing DRM offers to the paying customer is envy that the pirates are enjoying a better playing experience than we are.Pirates blame the developers for using DRM,Pirates blame no one , they just pirate the game .
They laugh at DRM .
They break it within days of its release , and do their thing .
Their thing is wrong .
It is not prevented in any way by DRM.the quality of the game is reduced for actual customersAgreed.yet the pirates are the one to blame.I 'd agree , except for the absolute and utter proof that DRM has no effect on large-scale or even for the most part casual piracy .
DRM prevents someone who does not want to break the law from breaking the law , but in general the people who are affected by DRM are the ones who want to pay for what we use .
DRM is a sign on the door of a house saying " ON VACATION FOR A MONTH , LOCK BROKEN , PLEASE DO N'T ROB ME " .
The honest people would n't have anyway , and the thieves are n't hampered by it.The only thing DRM prevents is backups by people who have paid for their copies and do n't want to break the law , or " home piracy " ( someone buys one copy and wants to use it on multiple computers , etc ) .Stop trying to spin the argument , pirates.Simple facts .
No spin .
I have purchased each and every game I 've ever played .
I also quickly developed the habit of downloading the pirated version of the game to actually play it , because I 've had games fail because my DVD drive was too old or too new ( Ubisoft , I 'm looking straight at you ) , or because of conflicting DRM schemes that break each other .
I 've also been reluctant to take my $ 50-75 original CDs that may not be backed up to a LAN party where they are subject to damage.The ONLY reason I used to pay for games is because I feel it 's important to compensate the studios for their hard work and efforts .
But I pirate copies of them afterward because I want to be able to use what I paid for , and I ca n't afford to keep swapping DVD drives out because one game does n't like the presence of one drive , and the other game does n't like the presence of the only drive the one game will run on , or the installation of a game puts on SecuROM that fucks up my drive for running another DRM scheme , or any one of a number of problems I have run into .
I 've had to completely reload XP twice ( and reactivate that ) just to undo the damage done by DRM schemes.After a while , I just got sick of it .
I stopped buying games .
I do n't pirate them , either .
I just do n't play any more .
It 's not fun any more , when something that is intended to entertain requires that I turn pirate or risk the operation of the rest of my computer .
I do n't even play the $ 750 in games I have purchased any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.
Pirating is far too widespread.You do realize, I hope, that DRM also doesn't stop piracy, and the only thing DRM offers to the paying customer is envy that the pirates are enjoying a better playing experience than we are.Pirates blame the developers for using DRM,Pirates blame no one, they just pirate the game.
They laugh at DRM.
They break it within days of its release, and do their thing.
Their thing is wrong.
It is not prevented in any way by DRM.the quality of the game is reduced for actual customersAgreed.yet the pirates are the one to blame.I'd agree, except for the absolute and utter proof that DRM has no effect on large-scale or even for the most part casual piracy.
DRM prevents someone who does not want to break the law from breaking the law, but in general the people who are affected by DRM are the ones who want to pay for what we use.
DRM is a sign on the door of a house saying "ON VACATION FOR A MONTH, LOCK BROKEN, PLEASE DON'T ROB ME".
The honest people wouldn't have anyway, and the thieves aren't hampered by it.The only thing DRM prevents is backups by people who have paid for their copies and don't want to break the law, or "home piracy" (someone buys one copy and wants to use it on multiple computers, etc).Stop trying to spin the argument, pirates.Simple facts.
No spin.
I have purchased each and every game I've ever played.
I also quickly developed the habit of downloading the pirated version of the game to actually play it, because I've had games fail because my DVD drive was too old or too new (Ubisoft, I'm looking straight at you), or because of conflicting DRM schemes that break each other.
I've also been reluctant to take my $50-75 original CDs that may not be backed up to a LAN party where they are subject to damage.The ONLY reason I used to pay for games is because I feel it's important to compensate the studios for their hard work and efforts.
But I pirate copies of them afterward because I want to be able to use what I paid for, and I can't afford to keep swapping DVD drives out because one game doesn't like the presence of one drive, and the other game doesn't like the presence of the only drive the one game will run on, or the installation of a game puts on SecuROM that fucks up my drive for running another DRM scheme, or any one of a number of problems I have run into.
I've had to completely reload XP twice (and reactivate that) just to undo the damage done by DRM schemes.After a while, I just got sick of it.
I stopped buying games.
I don't pirate them, either.
I just don't play any more.
It's not fun any more, when something that is intended to entertain requires that I turn pirate or risk the operation of the rest of my computer.
I don't even play the $750 in games I have purchased any more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368872</id>
	<title>Easier crack of their DRM scheme</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1267785840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just dont buy the garbage, I dont even care to get some patches from the black market, I simply do not buy their stuff anymore until they stop this scheme.<br>And believe me I bought more than a handful of games from them the last 10 years!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just dont buy the garbage , I dont even care to get some patches from the black market , I simply do not buy their stuff anymore until they stop this scheme.And believe me I bought more than a handful of games from them the last 10 years !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just dont buy the garbage, I dont even care to get some patches from the black market, I simply do not buy their stuff anymore until they stop this scheme.And believe me I bought more than a handful of games from them the last 10 years!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371190</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>3vi1</author>
	<datestamp>1267805640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; I don't think you get it. How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack? Then scan it for trojans?</p><p>One.  And that kid's going to give the patched version to 300 non-geek's at his school and every friend in his local CUG so that he can be their hero - it's been going on like that for at least 25 years.  No DRM would mean less incentive for people like that to actively spread the cracked version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; I do n't think you get it .
How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ?
Then scan it for trojans ? One .
And that kid 's going to give the patched version to 300 non-geek 's at his school and every friend in his local CUG so that he can be their hero - it 's been going on like that for at least 25 years .
No DRM would mean less incentive for people like that to actively spread the cracked version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; I don't think you get it.
How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?
Then scan it for trojans?One.
And that kid's going to give the patched version to 300 non-geek's at his school and every friend in his local CUG so that he can be their hero - it's been going on like that for at least 25 years.
No DRM would mean less incentive for people like that to actively spread the cracked version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366498</id>
	<title>And once again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the legitimate customers lose!  Ubisoft's encouragement of piracy has reached new heights with this move.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the legitimate customers lose !
Ubisoft 's encouragement of piracy has reached new heights with this move .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the legitimate customers lose!
Ubisoft's encouragement of piracy has reached new heights with this move.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31393384</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one. but I second that!</title>
	<author>Geotopia</author>
	<datestamp>1267954680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>""But Skippus, people would be able to copy the game from day one!" My contention is that I've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on."</p><p>Excellent synopsis and nice touch of humor. You can come work for me when I finally get my company going:)</p><p>On the serious side, the Movie, Video, Music, Games, and software business really have some wrong-thinking people at the helm, or at least idiot lawyers influencing the top brass. That anyone in a vibrant profitable company would sit around thinking of ways to protect intellectual property from being abused by their paying customers is idiocy in play. Just keep cranking out good stuff, and ignore this fictitious loss-by-piracy of sales that would never materialize anyway, and better yet, think of ways of turning pirated copies into sales leads converting them into paid copies. Musicians or their publishers should be stuffing the P2P networks with lower quality and perhaps shorter versions of their songs to bring on new sales (gosh, sounds like the AM radio controversy 3 generations ago!) Game makers should post FREE versions of their games. Make them shorter, or slightly disabled (enabled enough to get hooked), or better yet, put advertising inside the game, and then again, stuff the P2P networks with these official versions. Getting all draconian and punishing your paying customer base is true lunacy!</p><p>Final note, copyright and patent law is a false monopoly granted only by government. The market doesn't need IP protection* and IP protection isn't supported by the market. It's certainly not supported by any legal theories of equity. Games makers or any other purveyor of a virtual product are welcome to do whatever they'd like to increase their sales and profit margins, but everyone should take note and remember that the entire construct of intellectual "property" is an act of fiat by government, originally instituted so that creators have an incentive to be creative. But this rootkit crap and DRM is destructive and is backfiring on the various industries. For proof in the past, check out the section of the Copyright Act called "Compulsory Licensing".</p><p>* I'm referring to DMCA restrictions of an individual copying their own purchases, not the wholesale duplication and distribution of bootleg media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" " But Skippus , people would be able to copy the game from day one !
" My contention is that I 've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on .
" Excellent synopsis and nice touch of humor .
You can come work for me when I finally get my company going : ) On the serious side , the Movie , Video , Music , Games , and software business really have some wrong-thinking people at the helm , or at least idiot lawyers influencing the top brass .
That anyone in a vibrant profitable company would sit around thinking of ways to protect intellectual property from being abused by their paying customers is idiocy in play .
Just keep cranking out good stuff , and ignore this fictitious loss-by-piracy of sales that would never materialize anyway , and better yet , think of ways of turning pirated copies into sales leads converting them into paid copies .
Musicians or their publishers should be stuffing the P2P networks with lower quality and perhaps shorter versions of their songs to bring on new sales ( gosh , sounds like the AM radio controversy 3 generations ago !
) Game makers should post FREE versions of their games .
Make them shorter , or slightly disabled ( enabled enough to get hooked ) , or better yet , put advertising inside the game , and then again , stuff the P2P networks with these official versions .
Getting all draconian and punishing your paying customer base is true lunacy ! Final note , copyright and patent law is a false monopoly granted only by government .
The market does n't need IP protection * and IP protection is n't supported by the market .
It 's certainly not supported by any legal theories of equity .
Games makers or any other purveyor of a virtual product are welcome to do whatever they 'd like to increase their sales and profit margins , but everyone should take note and remember that the entire construct of intellectual " property " is an act of fiat by government , originally instituted so that creators have an incentive to be creative .
But this rootkit crap and DRM is destructive and is backfiring on the various industries .
For proof in the past , check out the section of the Copyright Act called " Compulsory Licensing " .
* I 'm referring to DMCA restrictions of an individual copying their own purchases , not the wholesale duplication and distribution of bootleg media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>""But Skippus, people would be able to copy the game from day one!
" My contention is that I've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on.
"Excellent synopsis and nice touch of humor.
You can come work for me when I finally get my company going:)On the serious side, the Movie, Video, Music, Games, and software business really have some wrong-thinking people at the helm, or at least idiot lawyers influencing the top brass.
That anyone in a vibrant profitable company would sit around thinking of ways to protect intellectual property from being abused by their paying customers is idiocy in play.
Just keep cranking out good stuff, and ignore this fictitious loss-by-piracy of sales that would never materialize anyway, and better yet, think of ways of turning pirated copies into sales leads converting them into paid copies.
Musicians or their publishers should be stuffing the P2P networks with lower quality and perhaps shorter versions of their songs to bring on new sales (gosh, sounds like the AM radio controversy 3 generations ago!
) Game makers should post FREE versions of their games.
Make them shorter, or slightly disabled (enabled enough to get hooked), or better yet, put advertising inside the game, and then again, stuff the P2P networks with these official versions.
Getting all draconian and punishing your paying customer base is true lunacy!Final note, copyright and patent law is a false monopoly granted only by government.
The market doesn't need IP protection* and IP protection isn't supported by the market.
It's certainly not supported by any legal theories of equity.
Games makers or any other purveyor of a virtual product are welcome to do whatever they'd like to increase their sales and profit margins, but everyone should take note and remember that the entire construct of intellectual "property" is an act of fiat by government, originally instituted so that creators have an incentive to be creative.
But this rootkit crap and DRM is destructive and is backfiring on the various industries.
For proof in the past, check out the section of the Copyright Act called "Compulsory Licensing".
* I'm referring to DMCA restrictions of an individual copying their own purchases, not the wholesale duplication and distribution of bootleg media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369620</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267795260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And that is the best game advertisement I have seen in a long time, right there!</p><p>Honesty deserves honesty. Respect deserves respect.</p><p>(But one thing you need... in the big buy button in your games list&rsquo;s detail page. ^^)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And that is the best game advertisement I have seen in a long time , right there ! Honesty deserves honesty .
Respect deserves respect .
( But one thing you need... in the big buy button in your games list    s detail page .
^ ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And that is the best game advertisement I have seen in a long time, right there!Honesty deserves honesty.
Respect deserves respect.
(But one thing you need... in the big buy button in your games list’s detail page.
^^)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367546</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1267726380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While you have a point, consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable. As a compromise, I suggest buying it, pirating it, and writing an angry letter explaining the situation. It'll be ignored of course, but it would make me feel better.</p></div><p>I'd suggest pirating it and sending an angry letter.  That way they get the angry letter knowing that you won't buy the game due to the DRM and you still get the pleasure of playing it as an additional "fuck you" to the company that screws over their paying customers.  I'm very against pirating because you don't want to pay for something, but recently I got mad enough at game companies screwing over their paying customers that I started downloading DRM'd (and only DRM'd) games.  I'm not paying for it anyways, due to the DRM, so getting a pirated copy doesn't harm them and I get the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that if the evil bastards hadn't put DRM in, I'd have paid $60 for the game - due to their greed and general asshole-ish behavior, they got $0.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While you have a point , consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable .
As a compromise , I suggest buying it , pirating it , and writing an angry letter explaining the situation .
It 'll be ignored of course , but it would make me feel better.I 'd suggest pirating it and sending an angry letter .
That way they get the angry letter knowing that you wo n't buy the game due to the DRM and you still get the pleasure of playing it as an additional " fuck you " to the company that screws over their paying customers .
I 'm very against pirating because you do n't want to pay for something , but recently I got mad enough at game companies screwing over their paying customers that I started downloading DRM 'd ( and only DRM 'd ) games .
I 'm not paying for it anyways , due to the DRM , so getting a pirated copy does n't harm them and I get the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that if the evil bastards had n't put DRM in , I 'd have paid $ 60 for the game - due to their greed and general asshole-ish behavior , they got $ 0 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you have a point, consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable.
As a compromise, I suggest buying it, pirating it, and writing an angry letter explaining the situation.
It'll be ignored of course, but it would make me feel better.I'd suggest pirating it and sending an angry letter.
That way they get the angry letter knowing that you won't buy the game due to the DRM and you still get the pleasure of playing it as an additional "fuck you" to the company that screws over their paying customers.
I'm very against pirating because you don't want to pay for something, but recently I got mad enough at game companies screwing over their paying customers that I started downloading DRM'd (and only DRM'd) games.
I'm not paying for it anyways, due to the DRM, so getting a pirated copy doesn't harm them and I get the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that if the evil bastards hadn't put DRM in, I'd have paid $60 for the game - due to their greed and general asshole-ish behavior, they got $0.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367074</id>
	<title>Torrent, please?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Awesome news!   What is the URL to the counterfeit (read: superior to the genuine) product?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Awesome news !
What is the URL to the counterfeit ( read : superior to the genuine ) product ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Awesome news!
What is the URL to the counterfeit (read: superior to the genuine) product?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366906</id>
	<title>Yeah no surprise</title>
	<author>DrugCheese</author>
	<datestamp>1267721580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not the first internet based anti-piracy tool circumvented. There have been plenty in the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not the first internet based anti-piracy tool circumvented .
There have been plenty in the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not the first internet based anti-piracy tool circumvented.
There have been plenty in the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367532</id>
	<title>Re:Surprise!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubisoft Sinks DRM Piracy Claims</p><p><a href="http://kotaku.com/5485502/ubisoft-sinks-drm-piracy-claims" title="kotaku.com" rel="nofollow">http://kotaku.com/5485502/ubisoft-sinks-drm-piracy-claims</a> [kotaku.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft Sinks DRM Piracy Claimshttp : //kotaku.com/5485502/ubisoft-sinks-drm-piracy-claims [ kotaku.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft Sinks DRM Piracy Claimshttp://kotaku.com/5485502/ubisoft-sinks-drm-piracy-claims [kotaku.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369966</id>
	<title>IBM implemented it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267798500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IBM was the designing force behind the best console DRM up to now. It was small change compared to the amount of work to design the rest of the Cell.</p><p>Anyway, you've really, really, cherry picked here. As others have pointed out, you picked a console (as opposed to a PC game), and you picked the one console with the best DRM (maybe you should have averaged it with Microsoft's pitiful first attempt with the original Xbox).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IBM was the designing force behind the best console DRM up to now .
It was small change compared to the amount of work to design the rest of the Cell.Anyway , you 've really , really , cherry picked here .
As others have pointed out , you picked a console ( as opposed to a PC game ) , and you picked the one console with the best DRM ( maybe you should have averaged it with Microsoft 's pitiful first attempt with the original Xbox ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IBM was the designing force behind the best console DRM up to now.
It was small change compared to the amount of work to design the rest of the Cell.Anyway, you've really, really, cherry picked here.
As others have pointed out, you picked a console (as opposed to a PC game), and you picked the one console with the best DRM (maybe you should have averaged it with Microsoft's pitiful first attempt with the original Xbox).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Karganeth</author>
	<datestamp>1267722540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That argument is completely absurd (which makes me wonder the hell modded you +5 insightful!?).  Just because you don't like DRM doesn't mean you can use broken logic to argue against it. <b>You cannot blame DRM creators for malware</b> because it doesn't make sense.  It would be like blaming and then sentencing the woman for being raped (as she was wearing an attractive outfit). The fuckwits who try and fail to download cracks (and instead end up downloading malware) are entirely responsible for having an infected machine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That argument is completely absurd ( which makes me wonder the hell modded you + 5 insightful ! ? ) .
Just because you do n't like DRM does n't mean you can use broken logic to argue against it .
You can not blame DRM creators for malware because it does n't make sense .
It would be like blaming and then sentencing the woman for being raped ( as she was wearing an attractive outfit ) .
The fuckwits who try and fail to download cracks ( and instead end up downloading malware ) are entirely responsible for having an infected machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That argument is completely absurd (which makes me wonder the hell modded you +5 insightful!?).
Just because you don't like DRM doesn't mean you can use broken logic to argue against it.
You cannot blame DRM creators for malware because it doesn't make sense.
It would be like blaming and then sentencing the woman for being raped (as she was wearing an attractive outfit).
The fuckwits who try and fail to download cracks (and instead end up downloading malware) are entirely responsible for having an infected machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366710</id>
	<title>Of course pirates always get a superior product</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267720320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They didn't have to pay for it, duh.  How could businesses possibly match that and make money?</p><p>This stupid meme really needs to stop.  It's getting old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They did n't have to pay for it , duh .
How could businesses possibly match that and make money ? This stupid meme really needs to stop .
It 's getting old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They didn't have to pay for it, duh.
How could businesses possibly match that and make money?This stupid meme really needs to stop.
It's getting old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367358</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironically, the <a href="http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1565564&amp;cid=31300706" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">2008 Prince of Persia, from the same company and same studio, did ship sans DRM</a> [slashdot.org].  Not even a disk check.</p><p>That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud "customers" on Slashdot claim it would.</p><p>#cue all the "butbutbut that game didn't sell well because I didn't like that game, not because of the lack of DRM" comments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironically , the 2008 Prince of Persia , from the same company and same studio , did ship sans DRM [ slashdot.org ] .
Not even a disk check.That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud " customers " on Slashdot claim it would. # cue all the " butbutbut that game did n't sell well because I did n't like that game , not because of the lack of DRM " comments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironically, the 2008 Prince of Persia, from the same company and same studio, did ship sans DRM [slashdot.org].
Not even a disk check.That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud "customers" on Slashdot claim it would.#cue all the "butbutbut that game didn't sell well because I didn't like that game, not because of the lack of DRM" comments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367150</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>ekhben</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it was a bone-head move, because I meant "made an unauthorized copy".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it was a bone-head move , because I meant " made an unauthorized copy " .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it was a bone-head move, because I meant "made an unauthorized copy".
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367010</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>hardburn</author>
	<datestamp>1267722180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.</p></div><p>Not only that, but also so their shareholders don't sue them for failing due diligence. I suspect that's the real reason for all the failed DRM systems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft can always blame " those damn pirates " and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.Not only that , but also so their shareholders do n't sue them for failing due diligence .
I suspect that 's the real reason for all the failed DRM systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.Not only that, but also so their shareholders don't sue them for failing due diligence.
I suspect that's the real reason for all the failed DRM systems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369224</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1267790040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, they lost quite a lot of money. The DRM system costed tangible manhours of developer work, convertible to real money. Good several hundred thousands possibly. Since the purpose of it was defeated in day one, all this money went down the drain, because there will be exactly zero of return on investment on that part of project (and all the extra losses due to bad PR).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , they lost quite a lot of money .
The DRM system costed tangible manhours of developer work , convertible to real money .
Good several hundred thousands possibly .
Since the purpose of it was defeated in day one , all this money went down the drain , because there will be exactly zero of return on investment on that part of project ( and all the extra losses due to bad PR ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, they lost quite a lot of money.
The DRM system costed tangible manhours of developer work, convertible to real money.
Good several hundred thousands possibly.
Since the purpose of it was defeated in day one, all this money went down the drain, because there will be exactly zero of return on investment on that part of project (and all the extra losses due to bad PR).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367080</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the people who download warez are clearly the same people who pay $64 for a video game.</p><p>right</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the people who download warez are clearly the same people who pay $ 64 for a video game.right</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the people who download warez are clearly the same people who pay $64 for a video game.right</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369822</id>
	<title>You're solving the wrong problem</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1267797240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're IMHO seeing the wrong problem, or rather just one half of the problem.</p><p>While a system like this won't and didn't stop piracy, it might just achieve what other systems have failed, and that the publishers have been whining for for a decade: it might just revoke a lot of honest customers' consumer rights.</p><p>Let's face it, one of the things they \_have\_ before whined about, and occasionally even tried to prevent, is that you can buy a second hand copy on eBay instead of paying them for it. You know, just for like any other product out there. You can buy a second hand car, a second hand lawnmower, even a second hand gun, but God forbid that you might buy a computer game second hand.</p><p>Tying your right to play to an account on their servers, well, pretty much means you can't sell the game without selling the account. If you registered more than one game on one account (I dunno this one, but for example EA's accounts are tied to an email address, and Joe Average only has one email address), it means you have to give someone access to them \_all\_ when you wanted to sell one game, and might also mean they get to use your DLC points, post in your name, see your details, and depending on how it's implemented it might lock you out while they play on that account. Heck, some of these might apply even without selling it, but even when just letting your kid play the game after you're done with it or viceversa.</p><p>It just added a layer of pain in the ass for every Joe Average out there who isn't even considering piracy at all, but just tries to exercises what passes for consumer rights in any other domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're IMHO seeing the wrong problem , or rather just one half of the problem.While a system like this wo n't and did n't stop piracy , it might just achieve what other systems have failed , and that the publishers have been whining for for a decade : it might just revoke a lot of honest customers ' consumer rights.Let 's face it , one of the things they \ _have \ _ before whined about , and occasionally even tried to prevent , is that you can buy a second hand copy on eBay instead of paying them for it .
You know , just for like any other product out there .
You can buy a second hand car , a second hand lawnmower , even a second hand gun , but God forbid that you might buy a computer game second hand.Tying your right to play to an account on their servers , well , pretty much means you ca n't sell the game without selling the account .
If you registered more than one game on one account ( I dunno this one , but for example EA 's accounts are tied to an email address , and Joe Average only has one email address ) , it means you have to give someone access to them \ _all \ _ when you wanted to sell one game , and might also mean they get to use your DLC points , post in your name , see your details , and depending on how it 's implemented it might lock you out while they play on that account .
Heck , some of these might apply even without selling it , but even when just letting your kid play the game after you 're done with it or viceversa.It just added a layer of pain in the ass for every Joe Average out there who is n't even considering piracy at all , but just tries to exercises what passes for consumer rights in any other domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're IMHO seeing the wrong problem, or rather just one half of the problem.While a system like this won't and didn't stop piracy, it might just achieve what other systems have failed, and that the publishers have been whining for for a decade: it might just revoke a lot of honest customers' consumer rights.Let's face it, one of the things they \_have\_ before whined about, and occasionally even tried to prevent, is that you can buy a second hand copy on eBay instead of paying them for it.
You know, just for like any other product out there.
You can buy a second hand car, a second hand lawnmower, even a second hand gun, but God forbid that you might buy a computer game second hand.Tying your right to play to an account on their servers, well, pretty much means you can't sell the game without selling the account.
If you registered more than one game on one account (I dunno this one, but for example EA's accounts are tied to an email address, and Joe Average only has one email address), it means you have to give someone access to them \_all\_ when you wanted to sell one game, and might also mean they get to use your DLC points, post in your name, see your details, and depending on how it's implemented it might lock you out while they play on that account.
Heck, some of these might apply even without selling it, but even when just letting your kid play the game after you're done with it or viceversa.It just added a layer of pain in the ass for every Joe Average out there who isn't even considering piracy at all, but just tries to exercises what passes for consumer rights in any other domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370398</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267801500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever been on the Internet?  Someone would decide to crack this just to kill the donations.  Some people are just dicks.</p><p>I'm waiting for someone to start using the ultimate "DRM model" to "protect" their games:</p><p>Bounty Hunting</p><p>No copyright protection at all on the game, but you get a $500 bounty for every "pirate" that you rat out that leads to a conviction or a settlement.</p><p>They could even call it an "Alternate Reality Game", and possibly get people to pay them to "play" it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever been on the Internet ?
Someone would decide to crack this just to kill the donations .
Some people are just dicks.I 'm waiting for someone to start using the ultimate " DRM model " to " protect " their games : Bounty HuntingNo copyright protection at all on the game , but you get a $ 500 bounty for every " pirate " that you rat out that leads to a conviction or a settlement.They could even call it an " Alternate Reality Game " , and possibly get people to pay them to " play " it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever been on the Internet?
Someone would decide to crack this just to kill the donations.
Some people are just dicks.I'm waiting for someone to start using the ultimate "DRM model" to "protect" their games:Bounty HuntingNo copyright protection at all on the game, but you get a $500 bounty for every "pirate" that you rat out that leads to a conviction or a settlement.They could even call it an "Alternate Reality Game", and possibly get people to pay them to "play" it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367034</id>
	<title>Re:No you're a dick</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And now we have it your way:</p><p>Management: Developers we're using DRM this time, period.</p><p>Developers: OK, we think we have an unbeatable system.</p><p>Customers: Lame.</p><p>Pirates: We cracked it.</p><p>Management: That unbeatable system was beaten and now the game is being pirated. Unfortunately we wasted untold billions paying you to develop that system and now that it's been broken and we're losing trillions in sales you're all fired.</p><p>go fuck yourself troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And now we have it your way : Management : Developers we 're using DRM this time , period.Developers : OK , we think we have an unbeatable system.Customers : Lame.Pirates : We cracked it.Management : That unbeatable system was beaten and now the game is being pirated .
Unfortunately we wasted untold billions paying you to develop that system and now that it 's been broken and we 're losing trillions in sales you 're all fired.go fuck yourself troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And now we have it your way:Management: Developers we're using DRM this time, period.Developers: OK, we think we have an unbeatable system.Customers: Lame.Pirates: We cracked it.Management: That unbeatable system was beaten and now the game is being pirated.
Unfortunately we wasted untold billions paying you to develop that system and now that it's been broken and we're losing trillions in sales you're all fired.go fuck yourself troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</id>
	<title>It only takes one.</title>
	<author>KingSkippus</author>
	<datestamp>1267725420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing that I'm surprised about is that companies remain so obstinately stupid in trying to implement Digital Rights Restrictions.</p><p>Anyone who has ever been involved in software development knows that even when it comes to relatively simple systems, all it takes is one minor SNAFU, one little bug, for the whole thing to be laid bare before skilled hackers.  And it doesn't even have to be a problem with your code; it can be in anything from firmware to the operating system to libraries you've linked to to the compiler you used.  Add to this the fact that Digital Rights Restriction systems are hardly anything but relatively simple; they typically encompass very complex encryption, heavy duty mathematics, picky dependencies on very specialized hardware and/or software and/or connectivity requirements, etc.</p><p>Also, how many people did it take to write your Digital Rights Restrictions system, and how smart were they?  Let me tell you, it's not like there's just one guy holed up in a basement somewhere working on cracking the Digital Rights Restrictions of a popular game.  There are thousands, maybe tens of thousands.  And they all want that reputation boost (or sometimes even financial gain) of being The One Who Cracked [insert game title here].  Oh, and maybe your people are smart, but these people are frickin' <i>brilliant</i>.</p><p>Yet still, these companies are under the delusion that after decades of abject failure after abject failure by companies much bigger and more motivated than they are to stop software theft, they're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet, that special recipe that will keep their software locked.  So sure of it, in fact, that they're continually willing to invest a lot of time, money, and effort into their futile pursuit.  The reality of the situation is that all it takes is one.  One hacker, one flaw, and every cent you poured into your Digital Rights Restrictions system is *poof!* gone.</p><p>I'd like them to hire me to create the Digital Rights Restrictions system they use for their next game.  I'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that says, "It would really mean a lot to us if you would not copy this game illegally, so please don't.  Thanks!"  Now, I know you're probably thinking, "But Skippus, people would be able to copy the game from day one!"  My contention is that I've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing that I 'm surprised about is that companies remain so obstinately stupid in trying to implement Digital Rights Restrictions.Anyone who has ever been involved in software development knows that even when it comes to relatively simple systems , all it takes is one minor SNAFU , one little bug , for the whole thing to be laid bare before skilled hackers .
And it does n't even have to be a problem with your code ; it can be in anything from firmware to the operating system to libraries you 've linked to to the compiler you used .
Add to this the fact that Digital Rights Restriction systems are hardly anything but relatively simple ; they typically encompass very complex encryption , heavy duty mathematics , picky dependencies on very specialized hardware and/or software and/or connectivity requirements , etc.Also , how many people did it take to write your Digital Rights Restrictions system , and how smart were they ?
Let me tell you , it 's not like there 's just one guy holed up in a basement somewhere working on cracking the Digital Rights Restrictions of a popular game .
There are thousands , maybe tens of thousands .
And they all want that reputation boost ( or sometimes even financial gain ) of being The One Who Cracked [ insert game title here ] .
Oh , and maybe your people are smart , but these people are frickin ' brilliant.Yet still , these companies are under the delusion that after decades of abject failure after abject failure by companies much bigger and more motivated than they are to stop software theft , they 're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet , that special recipe that will keep their software locked .
So sure of it , in fact , that they 're continually willing to invest a lot of time , money , and effort into their futile pursuit .
The reality of the situation is that all it takes is one .
One hacker , one flaw , and every cent you poured into your Digital Rights Restrictions system is * poof !
* gone.I 'd like them to hire me to create the Digital Rights Restrictions system they use for their next game .
I 'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that says , " It would really mean a lot to us if you would not copy this game illegally , so please do n't .
Thanks ! " Now , I know you 're probably thinking , " But Skippus , people would be able to copy the game from day one !
" My contention is that I 've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing that I'm surprised about is that companies remain so obstinately stupid in trying to implement Digital Rights Restrictions.Anyone who has ever been involved in software development knows that even when it comes to relatively simple systems, all it takes is one minor SNAFU, one little bug, for the whole thing to be laid bare before skilled hackers.
And it doesn't even have to be a problem with your code; it can be in anything from firmware to the operating system to libraries you've linked to to the compiler you used.
Add to this the fact that Digital Rights Restriction systems are hardly anything but relatively simple; they typically encompass very complex encryption, heavy duty mathematics, picky dependencies on very specialized hardware and/or software and/or connectivity requirements, etc.Also, how many people did it take to write your Digital Rights Restrictions system, and how smart were they?
Let me tell you, it's not like there's just one guy holed up in a basement somewhere working on cracking the Digital Rights Restrictions of a popular game.
There are thousands, maybe tens of thousands.
And they all want that reputation boost (or sometimes even financial gain) of being The One Who Cracked [insert game title here].
Oh, and maybe your people are smart, but these people are frickin' brilliant.Yet still, these companies are under the delusion that after decades of abject failure after abject failure by companies much bigger and more motivated than they are to stop software theft, they're going to be the ones that come up with the magic bullet, that special recipe that will keep their software locked.
So sure of it, in fact, that they're continually willing to invest a lot of time, money, and effort into their futile pursuit.
The reality of the situation is that all it takes is one.
One hacker, one flaw, and every cent you poured into your Digital Rights Restrictions system is *poof!
* gone.I'd like them to hire me to create the Digital Rights Restrictions system they use for their next game.
I'll charge them a few thousand dollars and put a text file on the root of the installation media that says, "It would really mean a lot to us if you would not copy this game illegally, so please don't.
Thanks!"  Now, I know you're probably thinking, "But Skippus, people would be able to copy the game from day one!
"  My contention is that I've saved them tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and my Digital Rights Restrictions system lasted just one day less than the one they would have otherwise spent so much money on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328</id>
	<title>Off topic, but fundamental to the discussion...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267791480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If there existed a method of Digital Rights Management that: <br>
 <br>
- was completely invisible to the user,<br>
- installed nothing on your client, <br>
- had negligible computational overhead, <br>
- worked perfectly (100\% of legitimate copies pass, 100\% of illegitimate copies rejected,) <br>
- rigorously respected your privacy, <br>
- added no cost to the product,  <br>
- smelled lemon fresh. <br>
 <br>
Would you be in favor of or oppose this hypothetical implementation of DRM?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there existed a method of Digital Rights Management that : - was completely invisible to the user , - installed nothing on your client , - had negligible computational overhead , - worked perfectly ( 100 \ % of legitimate copies pass , 100 \ % of illegitimate copies rejected , ) - rigorously respected your privacy , - added no cost to the product , - smelled lemon fresh .
Would you be in favor of or oppose this hypothetical implementation of DRM ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there existed a method of Digital Rights Management that: 
 
- was completely invisible to the user,
- installed nothing on your client, 
- had negligible computational overhead, 
- worked perfectly (100\% of legitimate copies pass, 100\% of illegitimate copies rejected,) 
- rigorously respected your privacy, 
- added no cost to the product,  
- smelled lemon fresh.
Would you be in favor of or oppose this hypothetical implementation of DRM?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367908</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>aliquis</author>
	<datestamp>1267730220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And paying customers still get to take it in the ass</p></div><p>Ah, so there IS a reason to still buy the game after all!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And paying customers still get to take it in the assAh , so there IS a reason to still buy the game after all !
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And paying customers still get to take it in the assAh, so there IS a reason to still buy the game after all!
:D
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367964</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if everyone just refused to accept any product that was released with DRM?</p><p>Don't vote with your wallet, vote with your feet. It's the only way to help DRM believers survive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if everyone just refused to accept any product that was released with DRM ? Do n't vote with your wallet , vote with your feet .
It 's the only way to help DRM believers survive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if everyone just refused to accept any product that was released with DRM?Don't vote with your wallet, vote with your feet.
It's the only way to help DRM believers survive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369676</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft claims it lacks features.</title>
	<author>Aphoxema</author>
	<datestamp>1267795740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then someone with a "legit" copy just needs to get through the game the first time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then someone with a " legit " copy just needs to get through the game the first time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then someone with a "legit" copy just needs to get through the game the first time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370700</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1267803420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, there's still some file somewhere (can't remember if it's in a kext or whatever) that has their "please don't copy this" text. What's interesting is that Apple makes a buttload of money, by the game industry's logic they should've been bankrupt ages ago since they don't really have any copy protection for their OS (unless you call using EFI instead of BIOS copy protection but that's like saying that distributing your game on DVD is copy protection because everyone else uses CDs).</p><p>/Mikael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , there 's still some file somewhere ( ca n't remember if it 's in a kext or whatever ) that has their " please do n't copy this " text .
What 's interesting is that Apple makes a buttload of money , by the game industry 's logic they should 've been bankrupt ages ago since they do n't really have any copy protection for their OS ( unless you call using EFI instead of BIOS copy protection but that 's like saying that distributing your game on DVD is copy protection because everyone else uses CDs ) ./Mikael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, there's still some file somewhere (can't remember if it's in a kext or whatever) that has their "please don't copy this" text.
What's interesting is that Apple makes a buttload of money, by the game industry's logic they should've been bankrupt ages ago since they don't really have any copy protection for their OS (unless you call using EFI instead of BIOS copy protection but that's like saying that distributing your game on DVD is copy protection because everyone else uses CDs)./Mikael</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367260</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1267724100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then the DRM really is pointless and is only done to punish legit users.  Everytime some game publisher comes out with its "new unhackable drm" its defeated quickly.  The sad part is they still keep touting the next one.  The problem this time around is they concidered people who dont have constant internet connections (near me there are far more without broadband than with it) to be acceptable losses, then boasted about it resulting in further lost sales from people who flat out refuse to deal with them.  All thats left are those who dont know about it but have a broadband connection and the pirates who are going to have it anyway. The likely scenario is much lower sales than the last version of the game and once again they will use the usual piracy excuse.</p><p>Im just wondering how they are going to handle the backlash when some guy out in some rural area gets the game and finds he cant play it at all and cant return it or better yet when he buys it for his kids and they use their per minute 3g connection racking up an insane bill.  I fully expect a lawsuit within weeks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But then the DRM really is pointless and is only done to punish legit users .
Everytime some game publisher comes out with its " new unhackable drm " its defeated quickly .
The sad part is they still keep touting the next one .
The problem this time around is they concidered people who dont have constant internet connections ( near me there are far more without broadband than with it ) to be acceptable losses , then boasted about it resulting in further lost sales from people who flat out refuse to deal with them .
All thats left are those who dont know about it but have a broadband connection and the pirates who are going to have it anyway .
The likely scenario is much lower sales than the last version of the game and once again they will use the usual piracy excuse.Im just wondering how they are going to handle the backlash when some guy out in some rural area gets the game and finds he cant play it at all and cant return it or better yet when he buys it for his kids and they use their per minute 3g connection racking up an insane bill .
I fully expect a lawsuit within weeks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then the DRM really is pointless and is only done to punish legit users.
Everytime some game publisher comes out with its "new unhackable drm" its defeated quickly.
The sad part is they still keep touting the next one.
The problem this time around is they concidered people who dont have constant internet connections (near me there are far more without broadband than with it) to be acceptable losses, then boasted about it resulting in further lost sales from people who flat out refuse to deal with them.
All thats left are those who dont know about it but have a broadband connection and the pirates who are going to have it anyway.
The likely scenario is much lower sales than the last version of the game and once again they will use the usual piracy excuse.Im just wondering how they are going to handle the backlash when some guy out in some rural area gets the game and finds he cant play it at all and cant return it or better yet when he buys it for his kids and they use their per minute 3g connection racking up an insane bill.
I fully expect a lawsuit within weeks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367890</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267730040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Supertux,perhaps? Don't seem to recall any DRM on THAT one....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...ok, ok, maybe a really awful example. Crawling back under my bridge, now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Supertux,perhaps ?
Do n't seem to recall any DRM on THAT one.... ...ok , ok , maybe a really awful example .
Crawling back under my bridge , now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Supertux,perhaps?
Don't seem to recall any DRM on THAT one.... ...ok, ok, maybe a really awful example.
Crawling back under my bridge, now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368686</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>xtracto</author>
	<datestamp>1267783140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any. Pirating is far too widespread. For every person who pirates a game, less games are made for the PC for this very reason. Pirates blame the developers for using DRM, the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers, yet the pirates are the one to blame</p></div><p>And the funny thing is that DRM does not stop copyright infringement at any level. You do not even need to know how to apply a patch to play a pirated game.</p><p>The way it works these days is like this:<br>1. The game is released *with* DRM<br>2. Someone cracks and distribute the DRM<br>3. Someone else applies the crack and packages the whole game patched.<br>4. All the copyright infringers download the game already without DRM, they install it normally and run it without inconvenience.</p><p>The problem with DRM is that when adding it to some software, developers are in effect making such software less user friendly. This makes the cracked, Non-DRM software subjectively better for customers, and at less price.</p><p>Why do you think World of Warcraft does not have this "widespread piracy" problem? because the paid  content is *better* than the cracked content.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any .
Pirating is far too widespread .
For every person who pirates a game , less games are made for the PC for this very reason .
Pirates blame the developers for using DRM , the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers , yet the pirates are the one to blameAnd the funny thing is that DRM does not stop copyright infringement at any level .
You do not even need to know how to apply a patch to play a pirated game.The way it works these days is like this : 1 .
The game is released * with * DRM2 .
Someone cracks and distribute the DRM3 .
Someone else applies the crack and packages the whole game patched.4 .
All the copyright infringers download the game already without DRM , they install it normally and run it without inconvenience.The problem with DRM is that when adding it to some software , developers are in effect making such software less user friendly .
This makes the cracked , Non-DRM software subjectively better for customers , and at less price.Why do you think World of Warcraft does not have this " widespread piracy " problem ?
because the paid content is * better * than the cracked content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.
Pirating is far too widespread.
For every person who pirates a game, less games are made for the PC for this very reason.
Pirates blame the developers for using DRM, the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers, yet the pirates are the one to blameAnd the funny thing is that DRM does not stop copyright infringement at any level.
You do not even need to know how to apply a patch to play a pirated game.The way it works these days is like this:1.
The game is released *with* DRM2.
Someone cracks and distribute the DRM3.
Someone else applies the crack and packages the whole game patched.4.
All the copyright infringers download the game already without DRM, they install it normally and run it without inconvenience.The problem with DRM is that when adding it to some software, developers are in effect making such software less user friendly.
This makes the cracked, Non-DRM software subjectively better for customers, and at less price.Why do you think World of Warcraft does not have this "widespread piracy" problem?
because the paid  content is *better* than the cracked content.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371096</id>
	<title>Back to CARTS! YES!!!</title>
	<author>Xanavi</author>
	<datestamp>1267805160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>USB Cartridges.

Think how cool they could look. Maybe crazy ones with built in physics cards or storage.

I'd think that would be pretty cool</htmltext>
<tokenext>USB Cartridges .
Think how cool they could look .
Maybe crazy ones with built in physics cards or storage .
I 'd think that would be pretty cool</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USB Cartridges.
Think how cool they could look.
Maybe crazy ones with built in physics cards or storage.
I'd think that would be pretty cool</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.  I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games.  Users are lazy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... many don't even know how<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... sure, they'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it, but they'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how, or don't bother.</p></div><p>They already lost my money.  I was halfway interested in AC2.  Didn't buy it because of the DRM.  Didn't pirate it.  I have no intention of doing either.</p><p>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.  If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.  A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft is n't going to make much money on the game .
I 'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked , maybe even quickly - but they 'll still make good money from these games .
Users are lazy ... many are n't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack ... many do n't even know how .... sure , they 'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it , but they 'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how , or do n't bother.They already lost my money .
I was halfway interested in AC2 .
Did n't buy it because of the DRM .
Did n't pirate it .
I have no intention of doing either.This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go .
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that are n't matched by rising piracy figures , then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate , and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase .
A pirate does n't interest them , but a lost customer does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.
I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games.
Users are lazy ... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack ... many don't even know how .... sure, they'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it, but they'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how, or don't bother.They already lost my money.
I was halfway interested in AC2.
Didn't buy it because of the DRM.
Didn't pirate it.
I have no intention of doing either.This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.
A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368274</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267821000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I applaud you for making up a name that more accurately describes what it is, but it's better to turn their own acronym back on them. If someone asks you what DRM is, replying "Digital Rights Restrictions" doesn't make sense... DRM is DRR? what? Let's try to not confuse them further and just call it what it is, DRM is Digital Restrictions Management.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I applaud you for making up a name that more accurately describes what it is , but it 's better to turn their own acronym back on them .
If someone asks you what DRM is , replying " Digital Rights Restrictions " does n't make sense... DRM is DRR ?
what ? Let 's try to not confuse them further and just call it what it is , DRM is Digital Restrictions Management .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I applaud you for making up a name that more accurately describes what it is, but it's better to turn their own acronym back on them.
If someone asks you what DRM is, replying "Digital Rights Restrictions" doesn't make sense... DRM is DRR?
what? Let's try to not confuse them further and just call it what it is, DRM is Digital Restrictions Management.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370816</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>supersloshy</author>
	<datestamp>1267803840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>you'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it!</p></div><p>Civilization IV and World of Goo are two, and the latter can be played (with more features and configuration options) on Linux as well as Windows/Mac/Wii. I highly recommend these for being not only DRM free, but a heck of a lot of fun!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they 'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it ! Civilization IV and World of Goo are two , and the latter can be played ( with more features and configuration options ) on Linux as well as Windows/Mac/Wii .
I highly recommend these for being not only DRM free , but a heck of a lot of fun !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it!Civilization IV and World of Goo are two, and the latter can be played (with more features and configuration options) on Linux as well as Windows/Mac/Wii.
I highly recommend these for being not only DRM free, but a heck of a lot of fun!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>vertinox</author>
	<datestamp>1267724820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BULL SHIT</p><p>I say this because I know one company who sells tons of games and they use no DRM:</p><p><a href="http://www.paradoxplaza.com/" title="paradoxplaza.com">Paradox Interactive</a> [paradoxplaza.com]</p><p>Before they were self publishing, their publisher required them to have DRM in the store release, but the lead Dev patched it out in an official patch a few months later.</p><p>Now they self-publish and host Gamersgate, which beyond the download check, the game itself is completely copyable without any DRM whatsover.</p><p>Does that mean people pirate their games? Yes, they do, but players like myself have basically spent hundreds of dollars on their games because:</p><p>1. They have no DRM<br>2. The developers are active with speaking directly with users on the forums<br>3. They have open beta patches with registered users to test bug fixes with the gaming community rather than throwing stuff out there.</p><p>Yes, being a successful gaming company can be done without DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BULL SHITI say this because I know one company who sells tons of games and they use no DRM : Paradox Interactive [ paradoxplaza.com ] Before they were self publishing , their publisher required them to have DRM in the store release , but the lead Dev patched it out in an official patch a few months later.Now they self-publish and host Gamersgate , which beyond the download check , the game itself is completely copyable without any DRM whatsover.Does that mean people pirate their games ?
Yes , they do , but players like myself have basically spent hundreds of dollars on their games because : 1 .
They have no DRM2 .
The developers are active with speaking directly with users on the forums3 .
They have open beta patches with registered users to test bug fixes with the gaming community rather than throwing stuff out there.Yes , being a successful gaming company can be done without DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BULL SHITI say this because I know one company who sells tons of games and they use no DRM:Paradox Interactive [paradoxplaza.com]Before they were self publishing, their publisher required them to have DRM in the store release, but the lead Dev patched it out in an official patch a few months later.Now they self-publish and host Gamersgate, which beyond the download check, the game itself is completely copyable without any DRM whatsover.Does that mean people pirate their games?
Yes, they do, but players like myself have basically spent hundreds of dollars on their games because:1.
They have no DRM2.
The developers are active with speaking directly with users on the forums3.
They have open beta patches with registered users to test bug fixes with the gaming community rather than throwing stuff out there.Yes, being a successful gaming company can be done without DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367214</id>
	<title>Re:No you're a dick</title>
	<author>Theswager</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>trillions?</htmltext>
<tokenext>trillions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>trillions?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367034</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267721760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.  I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games.  Users are lazy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... many don't even know how<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... sure, they'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it, but they'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how, or don't bother.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft is n't going to make much money on the game .
I 'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked , maybe even quickly - but they 'll still make good money from these games .
Users are lazy ... many are n't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack ... many do n't even know how .... sure , they 'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it , but they 'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how , or do n't bother .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are assuming that because a crack was made available in less than 24hrs that this somehow means that Ubisoft isn't going to make much money on the game.
I'm sure the devs expected it to be cracked, maybe even quickly - but they'll still make good money from these games.
Users are lazy ... many aren't willing to troll warez sites to find the crack ... many don't even know how .... sure, they'll lose money from people who crack the game instead of buying it, but they'll still make a lot more from those that dont know how, or don't bother.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366594</id>
	<title>Is Skid-Row still alive?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I owe to them, from the 1990s, a couple of Amiga pir.. er.. evaluation version games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I owe to them , from the 1990s , a couple of Amiga pir.. er.. evaluation version games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I owe to them, from the 1990s, a couple of Amiga pir.. er.. evaluation version games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369084</id>
	<title>Re:fail</title>
	<author>kronosopher</author>
	<datestamp>1267788540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on don't actually apply all that well to digital media.</p></div><p>
Generally even minor threats to corporate relevancy are perceived as negative and consequently worthy of extinguishing.  This is a problem of economy, as you allude.  Publishers are responding in ways that are typically valid in older models to manufacture artificial scarcity, therein elevating price-points which line their pockets and bankrupt gamers(financially and intellectually).  What publishers don't seem to realize is that this practice is very costly, only partially successful, and at direct odds with the abundant emergent nature of digital media.  While continuing to neglect what potentially could be a significant competitive edge, they leave themselves open to others to invalidate their archaic thinking and either force them to adapt or destroy them entirely.<br> <br>

DRM, like any other effort to squash freedom, is a symptomatic response to a lack of technological sophistication in the society.  This selfish thinking permeates almost every industry in the world today and creates gross misrepresentations of value that further debase the economy and plummet society into deeper depression.  The internet has ushered in one of the few abundant resources we have, aside from water and air, <i>information</i>.  Digital media abundant, does not adhere to any classic economic model of scarcity, and therefore any effort to circumvent that is costly, totally superfluous, and doomed to fail.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on do n't actually apply all that well to digital media .
Generally even minor threats to corporate relevancy are perceived as negative and consequently worthy of extinguishing .
This is a problem of economy , as you allude .
Publishers are responding in ways that are typically valid in older models to manufacture artificial scarcity , therein elevating price-points which line their pockets and bankrupt gamers ( financially and intellectually ) .
What publishers do n't seem to realize is that this practice is very costly , only partially successful , and at direct odds with the abundant emergent nature of digital media .
While continuing to neglect what potentially could be a significant competitive edge , they leave themselves open to others to invalidate their archaic thinking and either force them to adapt or destroy them entirely .
DRM , like any other effort to squash freedom , is a symptomatic response to a lack of technological sophistication in the society .
This selfish thinking permeates almost every industry in the world today and creates gross misrepresentations of value that further debase the economy and plummet society into deeper depression .
The internet has ushered in one of the few abundant resources we have , aside from water and air , information .
Digital media abundant , does not adhere to any classic economic model of scarcity , and therefore any effort to circumvent that is costly , totally superfluous , and doomed to fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on don't actually apply all that well to digital media.
Generally even minor threats to corporate relevancy are perceived as negative and consequently worthy of extinguishing.
This is a problem of economy, as you allude.
Publishers are responding in ways that are typically valid in older models to manufacture artificial scarcity, therein elevating price-points which line their pockets and bankrupt gamers(financially and intellectually).
What publishers don't seem to realize is that this practice is very costly, only partially successful, and at direct odds with the abundant emergent nature of digital media.
While continuing to neglect what potentially could be a significant competitive edge, they leave themselves open to others to invalidate their archaic thinking and either force them to adapt or destroy them entirely.
DRM, like any other effort to squash freedom, is a symptomatic response to a lack of technological sophistication in the society.
This selfish thinking permeates almost every industry in the world today and creates gross misrepresentations of value that further debase the economy and plummet society into deeper depression.
The internet has ushered in one of the few abundant resources we have, aside from water and air, information.
Digital media abundant, does not adhere to any classic economic model of scarcity, and therefore any effort to circumvent that is costly, totally superfluous, and doomed to fail.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369980</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1267798740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The flaw in your argument is that 99\% of customers just buy the game anyway, and the DRR is sufficient to stop casual copying.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The flaw in your argument is that 99 \ % of customers just buy the game anyway , and the DRR is sufficient to stop casual copying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The flaw in your argument is that 99\% of customers just buy the game anyway, and the DRR is sufficient to stop casual copying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370992</id>
	<title>So, does that mean i can buy Assassin's Creed 2</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1267804740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now, without having to deal with the immense STUPIDITY of ubisoft management and their beyond stupid 'drm' ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now , without having to deal with the immense STUPIDITY of ubisoft management and their beyond stupid 'drm ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now, without having to deal with the immense STUPIDITY of ubisoft management and their beyond stupid 'drm' ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367238</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's how your scenario looks in reality:</p><p>Developers: Lets put DRM in our software so that we can be certain our game will never be pirated!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:&gt;</p><p>Management: Brilliant!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p><p>Pirates: LULZ! Hack/crack ALAKAZAM! &gt;:D</p><p>Customers: Why doesn't my game work right? &gt;:O</p><p>Management: Developers, I'm sorry but customer outrage over our draconian DRM scheme has caused sales to tank, so we have to lay you off.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p><p>Developers: We should have left DRM out of the equation.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;\_;</p><p>DRM does not work, period. It fucks up users machines, slows down games, or causes a game to be pirated more than bought. Nobody likes being told what to do with something they bought and paid for. I bought, it's mine, I'll do as I please with it. Try to tell me otherwise, and you'll regret it one way or another. It's really not rocket science, Jr.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's how your scenario looks in reality : Developers : Lets put DRM in our software so that we can be certain our game will never be pirated !
: &gt; Management : Brilliant !
: D : D : DPirates : LULZ !
Hack/crack ALAKAZAM !
&gt; : DCustomers : Why does n't my game work right ?
&gt; : OManagement : Developers , I 'm sorry but customer outrage over our draconian DRM scheme has caused sales to tank , so we have to lay you off .
: -/Developers : We should have left DRM out of the equation .
; \ _ ; DRM does not work , period .
It fucks up users machines , slows down games , or causes a game to be pirated more than bought .
Nobody likes being told what to do with something they bought and paid for .
I bought , it 's mine , I 'll do as I please with it .
Try to tell me otherwise , and you 'll regret it one way or another .
It 's really not rocket science , Jr .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's how your scenario looks in reality:Developers: Lets put DRM in our software so that we can be certain our game will never be pirated!
:&gt;Management: Brilliant!
:D :D :DPirates: LULZ!
Hack/crack ALAKAZAM!
&gt;:DCustomers: Why doesn't my game work right?
&gt;:OManagement: Developers, I'm sorry but customer outrage over our draconian DRM scheme has caused sales to tank, so we have to lay you off.
:-/Developers: We should have left DRM out of the equation.
;\_;DRM does not work, period.
It fucks up users machines, slows down games, or causes a game to be pirated more than bought.
Nobody likes being told what to do with something they bought and paid for.
I bought, it's mine, I'll do as I please with it.
Try to tell me otherwise, and you'll regret it one way or another.
It's really not rocket science, Jr.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367122</id>
	<title>Re:The sad thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, I would pay for a game like Assassin's Creed 2, and then still go in and hack the game to disable this DRM.  I don't pirate nearly as much as I did when I was younger and couldn't afford anything, but something like this would just be an inconvenience to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , I would pay for a game like Assassin 's Creed 2 , and then still go in and hack the game to disable this DRM .
I do n't pirate nearly as much as I did when I was younger and could n't afford anything , but something like this would just be an inconvenience to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, I would pay for a game like Assassin's Creed 2, and then still go in and hack the game to disable this DRM.
I don't pirate nearly as much as I did when I was younger and couldn't afford anything, but something like this would just be an inconvenience to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366680</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>darkmalice</author>
	<datestamp>1267720020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree wholeheartedly with that first dot point.
the developers/companies forget that the DRM code/algo what have you  was created by humans and as with anything human-designed it isn't invulnerable, different thought patterns and ways of thinking will always find a way around something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree wholeheartedly with that first dot point .
the developers/companies forget that the DRM code/algo what have you was created by humans and as with anything human-designed it is n't invulnerable , different thought patterns and ways of thinking will always find a way around something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree wholeheartedly with that first dot point.
the developers/companies forget that the DRM code/algo what have you  was created by humans and as with anything human-designed it isn't invulnerable, different thought patterns and ways of thinking will always find a way around something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373668</id>
	<title>Deep inside Ubisoft HQ:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Marketing : "Sir, some people are stubbornly refusing to pirate our games. They keep going to stores and handing over money."<br>Boss : "WHAT ? Do these people not know about BitTorrent ?"<br>Marketing : "I hear a lot of them talking about 'moral values', whatever that is, and 'wanting developers to get paid'."<br>Boss : "Hmmm... how about if we convinced everyone that the developers are evil jerks ?"<br>Marketing : "That could work. I'll draft a proposal for some really onerous DRM."<br>Boss : "Good, good. I look forward to the day that we finally become free from the blight of paying customers."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Marketing : " Sir , some people are stubbornly refusing to pirate our games .
They keep going to stores and handing over money .
" Boss : " WHAT ?
Do these people not know about BitTorrent ?
" Marketing : " I hear a lot of them talking about 'moral values ' , whatever that is , and 'wanting developers to get paid' .
" Boss : " Hmmm... how about if we convinced everyone that the developers are evil jerks ?
" Marketing : " That could work .
I 'll draft a proposal for some really onerous DRM .
" Boss : " Good , good .
I look forward to the day that we finally become free from the blight of paying customers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Marketing : "Sir, some people are stubbornly refusing to pirate our games.
They keep going to stores and handing over money.
"Boss : "WHAT ?
Do these people not know about BitTorrent ?
"Marketing : "I hear a lot of them talking about 'moral values', whatever that is, and 'wanting developers to get paid'.
"Boss : "Hmmm... how about if we convinced everyone that the developers are evil jerks ?
"Marketing : "That could work.
I'll draft a proposal for some really onerous DRM.
"Boss : "Good, good.
I look forward to the day that we finally become free from the blight of paying customers.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367604</id>
	<title>Re:Remote Server Execution could work as DRM</title>
	<author>woopate</author>
	<datestamp>1267726920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then you <b>guarantee</b> that once the servers shut down, customers lose their game. It would take a pretty insane patch to make the game work without a remote server if a "non-trivial" portion of the game was being run on said remote server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But then you guarantee that once the servers shut down , customers lose their game .
It would take a pretty insane patch to make the game work without a remote server if a " non-trivial " portion of the game was being run on said remote server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then you guarantee that once the servers shut down, customers lose their game.
It would take a pretty insane patch to make the game work without a remote server if a "non-trivial" portion of the game was being run on said remote server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368610</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>pcolaman</author>
	<datestamp>1267782180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And include a footnote that games made by developers such as Stardock that refuse to use stupid DRM would be next on your list of games to buy.  (or insert random other company that obstains from retarded DRM)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And include a footnote that games made by developers such as Stardock that refuse to use stupid DRM would be next on your list of games to buy .
( or insert random other company that obstains from retarded DRM )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And include a footnote that games made by developers such as Stardock that refuse to use stupid DRM would be next on your list of games to buy.
(or insert random other company that obstains from retarded DRM)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368110</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>hughperkins</author>
	<datestamp>1267732680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, it's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way.  I mean, now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game, and everyone's basically implying that, if it wasn't for the DRM, it'd be a really awesome game, that everyone wants to play, and if no-one wants to play it, why is everyone talking about it?</p><p>Maybe DRM is a little bit like a girl playing "hard to get"?  Everyone likes to get something they need to work for a bit.  That's what levelling is all about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , it 's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way .
I mean , now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game , and everyone 's basically implying that , if it was n't for the DRM , it 'd be a really awesome game , that everyone wants to play , and if no-one wants to play it , why is everyone talking about it ? Maybe DRM is a little bit like a girl playing " hard to get " ?
Everyone likes to get something they need to work for a bit .
That 's what levelling is all about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, it's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way.
I mean, now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game, and everyone's basically implying that, if it wasn't for the DRM, it'd be a really awesome game, that everyone wants to play, and if no-one wants to play it, why is everyone talking about it?Maybe DRM is a little bit like a girl playing "hard to get"?
Everyone likes to get something they need to work for a bit.
That's what levelling is all about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368304</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>CeramicNuts</author>
	<datestamp>1267821420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just picked up Civilization 4 Complete -- DRM free.  The initial release of Civ4 had securom. The Complete set also includes the 2 exansions and Colonization. I was glad to purchase this one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just picked up Civilization 4 Complete -- DRM free .
The initial release of Civ4 had securom .
The Complete set also includes the 2 exansions and Colonization .
I was glad to purchase this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just picked up Civilization 4 Complete -- DRM free.
The initial release of Civ4 had securom.
The Complete set also includes the 2 exansions and Colonization.
I was glad to purchase this one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368806</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267784940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.</i></p><p>Or they just turn around and say "Our sales figures have declined, it must be because of piracy! We need MORE DRM! Better yet, lets go console exclusive!"</p><p>Just pirate away, cause either way PC gamers get screwed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that are n't matched by rising piracy figures , then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate , and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.Or they just turn around and say " Our sales figures have declined , it must be because of piracy !
We need MORE DRM !
Better yet , lets go console exclusive !
" Just pirate away , cause either way PC gamers get screwed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.Or they just turn around and say "Our sales figures have declined, it must be because of piracy!
We need MORE DRM!
Better yet, lets go console exclusive!
"Just pirate away, cause either way PC gamers get screwed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371048</id>
	<title>Enforce storing the savegame data in the cloud</title>
	<author>Goodl</author>
	<datestamp>1267804920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that way if you want a cracked version you can have it but have to do it all in a single sitting. inconvenient and makes going legit attractive if you like the game. Didnt they do this with Dirt2?</htmltext>
<tokenext>that way if you want a cracked version you can have it but have to do it all in a single sitting .
inconvenient and makes going legit attractive if you like the game .
Didnt they do this with Dirt2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that way if you want a cracked version you can have it but have to do it all in a single sitting.
inconvenient and makes going legit attractive if you like the game.
Didnt they do this with Dirt2?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367706</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last year Ubisoft released Prince of Persia on the PC without DRM. The game was heavily pirated.</p><p>They should  just abandon supporting the PC and fire their PC developers. Why are they even bothering with this platform when it's a lost cause?</p><p>It would be funny, if it weren't so stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last year Ubisoft released Prince of Persia on the PC without DRM .
The game was heavily pirated.They should just abandon supporting the PC and fire their PC developers .
Why are they even bothering with this platform when it 's a lost cause ? It would be funny , if it were n't so stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last year Ubisoft released Prince of Persia on the PC without DRM.
The game was heavily pirated.They should  just abandon supporting the PC and fire their PC developers.
Why are they even bothering with this platform when it's a lost cause?It would be funny, if it weren't so stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369036</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>LordLucless</author>
	<datestamp>1267787760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Consequences of using DRM: Development costs, bad publicity, it gets cracked first day, pirates pirate it.<br>
Consequences of not using DRM: Pirates pirate it.<br>
<br>
For every person who pirates a game, bugger all happens to the number of games that are released. That number's been rising for years, and shows no sign of stopping now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Consequences of using DRM : Development costs , bad publicity , it gets cracked first day , pirates pirate it .
Consequences of not using DRM : Pirates pirate it .
For every person who pirates a game , bugger all happens to the number of games that are released .
That number 's been rising for years , and shows no sign of stopping now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Consequences of using DRM: Development costs, bad publicity, it gets cracked first day, pirates pirate it.
Consequences of not using DRM: Pirates pirate it.
For every person who pirates a game, bugger all happens to the number of games that are released.
That number's been rising for years, and shows no sign of stopping now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367002</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.  This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.</p></div><p>Except that legit sceners release source code and instructions, not just binaries. At least the ones worth their salt do. Kiddies and crooks are the ones that wrap it up in malware.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose that , by shipping games with DRM , software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware .
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam , botnets , and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.Except that legit sceners release source code and instructions , not just binaries .
At least the ones worth their salt do .
Kiddies and crooks are the ones that wrap it up in malware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.Except that legit sceners release source code and instructions, not just binaries.
At least the ones worth their salt do.
Kiddies and crooks are the ones that wrap it up in malware.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369022</id>
	<title>faith...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267787460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now I have faith in mankind<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I have faith in mankind : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I have faith in mankind :D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367380</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>World of Goo sure bombed for not having any DRM.  Stupid pirates.</p><p>Wait a minute...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>World of Goo sure bombed for not having any DRM .
Stupid pirates.Wait a minute.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>World of Goo sure bombed for not having any DRM.
Stupid pirates.Wait a minute...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</id>
	<title>On the bright side...</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1267718580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.</p><p>And the pirates can still play the game for free with no issues.</p><p>And paying customers still get to take it in the ass, now AND when Ubisoft decides to can the online service.</p><p>Win, Win, Weeeeee</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft can always blame " those damn pirates " and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.And the pirates can still play the game for free with no issues.And paying customers still get to take it in the ass , now AND when Ubisoft decides to can the online service.Win , Win , Weeeeee</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.And the pirates can still play the game for free with no issues.And paying customers still get to take it in the ass, now AND when Ubisoft decides to can the online service.Win, Win, Weeeeee</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370288</id>
	<title>Don't forget the most important feature</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1267801020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget the most important feature: the gamme suddenly shutting down and dumping you at the desktop without warning or saving, if your internet connection as much as hickups. (Dunno about other providers, but at least T-Online still has at least one mandatory disconnect per day.)</p><p>I don't know about you, but if my game doesn't randomly crash to desktop, it's just not the same thing dammit. It's like I'm not even playing an Ubisoft game<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget the most important feature : the gamme suddenly shutting down and dumping you at the desktop without warning or saving , if your internet connection as much as hickups .
( Dunno about other providers , but at least T-Online still has at least one mandatory disconnect per day .
) I do n't know about you , but if my game does n't randomly crash to desktop , it 's just not the same thing dammit .
It 's like I 'm not even playing an Ubisoft game ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget the most important feature: the gamme suddenly shutting down and dumping you at the desktop without warning or saving, if your internet connection as much as hickups.
(Dunno about other providers, but at least T-Online still has at least one mandatory disconnect per day.
)I don't know about you, but if my game doesn't randomly crash to desktop, it's just not the same thing dammit.
It's like I'm not even playing an Ubisoft game ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368312</id>
	<title>Yes, DRM is socially irresponsible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267821480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the tip of the iceberg.  Shipping things with DRM also promotes piracy.</p><p>Now everyone knows <em>that</em> because it's obvious: it promotes piracy of the DRMed object.  Duh.  You will have fewer sales if you use DRM. <strong>But</strong> there's more to it than that.  <em>Everyone</em> will have fewer sales.  It hurts the entire industry.</p><p>Look at the situation with movies.  SD movies on DVD had DRM, but that DRM was completely cracked soon enough to leave a viable DVD market.  As a result, I could buy movies on DVD and be confident that I would be able to watch them, even though doing so violated federal law (DMCA).  Everyone won, even me.  Yes, I didn't win as much as I should have (since I took a very slight risk by illegally playing the movies I bought, but it was in my own home where no one would know).</p><p>High definition came along.  With Bluray, <em>each title</em> needs to be cracked.  As a result, before you buy a movie, you have to research to see if anyone has a key for it yet.  Bluray isn't viable, and <em>won't</em> be viable until the DRM is totally defeated.</p><p>So what is a normal person expected to do about high-definition movies?  Research titles before every purchase to make sure someone has found a way to make 'em work?  Really?!? People can't even be counted on to fucking <em>vote</em> in political elections, find out candidate positions other than what's in the 30-sec TV ads, etc, and you want them to research a $20 buy and never ever buy any Bluray on impulse?  That's fucking insane.  Let's be realistic about what someone is expected to do: pirate it.  Crackers have the time/motivation to deal with DRM; I don't.  I'll just download.</p><p>But we all know that.  Bluray DRM means substantially lower Bluray sales than what the movies could get.  Duh.  But here's the thing: the movie studios are training the users to start using the piracy infrastructure and habits.  Those customers <em>could</em> still be <em>DVD</em> customers and still occasionally spend some money on DVDs -- legally obtained but illegally played (i.e. the movie studios could receive <em>money</em>) -- even if they can't be part of a higher definition market.  But let's get serious, if you visit m00v13w4r3z.com torrent listing site every day to find highdef movies (since they're not for sale in playable form), pretty soon you're going to stop worrying about <em>which</em> movie files have written off being a serious part of the market (Bluray releases) and which movies are actually released with the intent of making a profit (DVD).  You're going to see Rocky 7, think "Ooh I wanna see geriatric boxing" and not give a flying fuck what resolution it is.  You're not going to see "480p" and then realize "Oh, this movies is for sale and I could actually buy it and be able to play it." You're just going to download it for free, because what if it's <em>not</em> 480p?  If it's 720p or higher, a cracked copy is your only hope of seeing anything other than a black screen.  Even if you do see "480p" and know you could buy the movie, "it's just another movie," and you've already pirated hundreds before that.</p><p>So what happens?  The user has exited the market.  That's not just a lost sale, that's a permanent lifetime <em>series</em> of sales.   Not just Disney sales when they sell DRMed works, it's Sony sales too.  It's even little independent filmmakers, because they can't sell DVDs even without CSS protection anymore, because Disney and Sony trained everyone to pirate. Once you go bittorrent, you don't go back.</p><p> <strong>That</strong> is how DRM is socially irresponsible.</p><p>At least that's how it is for movies and TV and there's just no doubt about it.  Games?  That's not my thing so I don't have the personal experience, but it's not hard to imagine similar things happening.  All it takes is a person spending money on one game with annoying DRM in it, to get 'em looking for the crack to the game they bought.  Now that user has a bittorrent client installed, and they have been to a website that lists hundre</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the tip of the iceberg .
Shipping things with DRM also promotes piracy.Now everyone knows that because it 's obvious : it promotes piracy of the DRMed object .
Duh. You will have fewer sales if you use DRM .
But there 's more to it than that .
Everyone will have fewer sales .
It hurts the entire industry.Look at the situation with movies .
SD movies on DVD had DRM , but that DRM was completely cracked soon enough to leave a viable DVD market .
As a result , I could buy movies on DVD and be confident that I would be able to watch them , even though doing so violated federal law ( DMCA ) .
Everyone won , even me .
Yes , I did n't win as much as I should have ( since I took a very slight risk by illegally playing the movies I bought , but it was in my own home where no one would know ) .High definition came along .
With Bluray , each title needs to be cracked .
As a result , before you buy a movie , you have to research to see if anyone has a key for it yet .
Bluray is n't viable , and wo n't be viable until the DRM is totally defeated.So what is a normal person expected to do about high-definition movies ?
Research titles before every purchase to make sure someone has found a way to make 'em work ?
Really ? ! ? People ca n't even be counted on to fucking vote in political elections , find out candidate positions other than what 's in the 30-sec TV ads , etc , and you want them to research a $ 20 buy and never ever buy any Bluray on impulse ?
That 's fucking insane .
Let 's be realistic about what someone is expected to do : pirate it .
Crackers have the time/motivation to deal with DRM ; I do n't .
I 'll just download.But we all know that .
Bluray DRM means substantially lower Bluray sales than what the movies could get .
Duh. But here 's the thing : the movie studios are training the users to start using the piracy infrastructure and habits .
Those customers could still be DVD customers and still occasionally spend some money on DVDs -- legally obtained but illegally played ( i.e .
the movie studios could receive money ) -- even if they ca n't be part of a higher definition market .
But let 's get serious , if you visit m00v13w4r3z.com torrent listing site every day to find highdef movies ( since they 're not for sale in playable form ) , pretty soon you 're going to stop worrying about which movie files have written off being a serious part of the market ( Bluray releases ) and which movies are actually released with the intent of making a profit ( DVD ) .
You 're going to see Rocky 7 , think " Ooh I wan na see geriatric boxing " and not give a flying fuck what resolution it is .
You 're not going to see " 480p " and then realize " Oh , this movies is for sale and I could actually buy it and be able to play it .
" You 're just going to download it for free , because what if it 's not 480p ?
If it 's 720p or higher , a cracked copy is your only hope of seeing anything other than a black screen .
Even if you do see " 480p " and know you could buy the movie , " it 's just another movie , " and you 've already pirated hundreds before that.So what happens ?
The user has exited the market .
That 's not just a lost sale , that 's a permanent lifetime series of sales .
Not just Disney sales when they sell DRMed works , it 's Sony sales too .
It 's even little independent filmmakers , because they ca n't sell DVDs even without CSS protection anymore , because Disney and Sony trained everyone to pirate .
Once you go bittorrent , you do n't go back .
That is how DRM is socially irresponsible.At least that 's how it is for movies and TV and there 's just no doubt about it .
Games ? That 's not my thing so I do n't have the personal experience , but it 's not hard to imagine similar things happening .
All it takes is a person spending money on one game with annoying DRM in it , to get 'em looking for the crack to the game they bought .
Now that user has a bittorrent client installed , and they have been to a website that lists hundre</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the tip of the iceberg.
Shipping things with DRM also promotes piracy.Now everyone knows that because it's obvious: it promotes piracy of the DRMed object.
Duh.  You will have fewer sales if you use DRM.
But there's more to it than that.
Everyone will have fewer sales.
It hurts the entire industry.Look at the situation with movies.
SD movies on DVD had DRM, but that DRM was completely cracked soon enough to leave a viable DVD market.
As a result, I could buy movies on DVD and be confident that I would be able to watch them, even though doing so violated federal law (DMCA).
Everyone won, even me.
Yes, I didn't win as much as I should have (since I took a very slight risk by illegally playing the movies I bought, but it was in my own home where no one would know).High definition came along.
With Bluray, each title needs to be cracked.
As a result, before you buy a movie, you have to research to see if anyone has a key for it yet.
Bluray isn't viable, and won't be viable until the DRM is totally defeated.So what is a normal person expected to do about high-definition movies?
Research titles before every purchase to make sure someone has found a way to make 'em work?
Really?!? People can't even be counted on to fucking vote in political elections, find out candidate positions other than what's in the 30-sec TV ads, etc, and you want them to research a $20 buy and never ever buy any Bluray on impulse?
That's fucking insane.
Let's be realistic about what someone is expected to do: pirate it.
Crackers have the time/motivation to deal with DRM; I don't.
I'll just download.But we all know that.
Bluray DRM means substantially lower Bluray sales than what the movies could get.
Duh.  But here's the thing: the movie studios are training the users to start using the piracy infrastructure and habits.
Those customers could still be DVD customers and still occasionally spend some money on DVDs -- legally obtained but illegally played (i.e.
the movie studios could receive money) -- even if they can't be part of a higher definition market.
But let's get serious, if you visit m00v13w4r3z.com torrent listing site every day to find highdef movies (since they're not for sale in playable form), pretty soon you're going to stop worrying about which movie files have written off being a serious part of the market (Bluray releases) and which movies are actually released with the intent of making a profit (DVD).
You're going to see Rocky 7, think "Ooh I wanna see geriatric boxing" and not give a flying fuck what resolution it is.
You're not going to see "480p" and then realize "Oh, this movies is for sale and I could actually buy it and be able to play it.
" You're just going to download it for free, because what if it's not 480p?
If it's 720p or higher, a cracked copy is your only hope of seeing anything other than a black screen.
Even if you do see "480p" and know you could buy the movie, "it's just another movie," and you've already pirated hundreds before that.So what happens?
The user has exited the market.
That's not just a lost sale, that's a permanent lifetime series of sales.
Not just Disney sales when they sell DRMed works, it's Sony sales too.
It's even little independent filmmakers, because they can't sell DVDs even without CSS protection anymore, because Disney and Sony trained everyone to pirate.
Once you go bittorrent, you don't go back.
That is how DRM is socially irresponsible.At least that's how it is for movies and TV and there's just no doubt about it.
Games?  That's not my thing so I don't have the personal experience, but it's not hard to imagine similar things happening.
All it takes is a person spending money on one game with annoying DRM in it, to get 'em looking for the crack to the game they bought.
Now that user has a bittorrent client installed, and they have been to a website that lists hundre</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369100</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft hates Troops</title>
	<author>MightyDrunken</author>
	<datestamp>1267788720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amusingly this could create the situation, where because of this crack many people who could not play now can. This could mean that Skid-Row's DRM crack will actually increase Ubisoft's sales.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amusingly this could create the situation , where because of this crack many people who could not play now can .
This could mean that Skid-Row 's DRM crack will actually increase Ubisoft 's sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amusingly this could create the situation, where because of this crack many people who could not play now can.
This could mean that Skid-Row's DRM crack will actually increase Ubisoft's sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31393726</id>
	<title>Money down the drain</title>
	<author>Databass</author>
	<datestamp>1267956960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welp, there's whatever UbiSoft spent on this scheme down the drain. What did they spend on this thing? A million bucks? I hope the one day of protection they got out of it was worth it.</p><p>The way I've always seen it is, every pirated copy MIGHT be a lost sale. Sure, some people who would have otherwise bought it will pirate it and not pay. But many of the pirates are people who had zero intention of buying the game anyway, but will give it a spin just to see what it is about if the only cost is one click and a few minutes of bandwidth. A small percentage of those may actually like it enough to pay for it. Myself, I'm not going to pay for nor even pirate Assassin's Creed 2. What does it say when I don't even care enough to show interest in the game for free?</p><p>Now, the people who make their living convincing the UbiSofts of the world to buy DRM are of course going to try to assume that every pirate represents a lost sale. "Heck, some of these people would probably have bought a copy for the kids too- so we'll just go ahead and say each pirated copy equals \_1.2\_ lost sales! That's like a kajillion sales lost! Give us that cool million dollars, and all those pirated copies will immediately convert back to cold, hard cash! You'll be RICH!!!" UbiSoft's decisionmakers have their eyes turn into dollar signs and fork over the million bucks.</p><p>Then some guys crack the thing in a day. Does the DRM team give the cool million bucks back if their DRM gets cracked that fast? I seriously doubt it. So all UbiSoft really did was lose a million bucks on DRM and annoy their legitimate customers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welp , there 's whatever UbiSoft spent on this scheme down the drain .
What did they spend on this thing ?
A million bucks ?
I hope the one day of protection they got out of it was worth it.The way I 've always seen it is , every pirated copy MIGHT be a lost sale .
Sure , some people who would have otherwise bought it will pirate it and not pay .
But many of the pirates are people who had zero intention of buying the game anyway , but will give it a spin just to see what it is about if the only cost is one click and a few minutes of bandwidth .
A small percentage of those may actually like it enough to pay for it .
Myself , I 'm not going to pay for nor even pirate Assassin 's Creed 2 .
What does it say when I do n't even care enough to show interest in the game for free ? Now , the people who make their living convincing the UbiSofts of the world to buy DRM are of course going to try to assume that every pirate represents a lost sale .
" Heck , some of these people would probably have bought a copy for the kids too- so we 'll just go ahead and say each pirated copy equals \ _1.2 \ _ lost sales !
That 's like a kajillion sales lost !
Give us that cool million dollars , and all those pirated copies will immediately convert back to cold , hard cash !
You 'll be RICH ! ! !
" UbiSoft 's decisionmakers have their eyes turn into dollar signs and fork over the million bucks.Then some guys crack the thing in a day .
Does the DRM team give the cool million bucks back if their DRM gets cracked that fast ?
I seriously doubt it .
So all UbiSoft really did was lose a million bucks on DRM and annoy their legitimate customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welp, there's whatever UbiSoft spent on this scheme down the drain.
What did they spend on this thing?
A million bucks?
I hope the one day of protection they got out of it was worth it.The way I've always seen it is, every pirated copy MIGHT be a lost sale.
Sure, some people who would have otherwise bought it will pirate it and not pay.
But many of the pirates are people who had zero intention of buying the game anyway, but will give it a spin just to see what it is about if the only cost is one click and a few minutes of bandwidth.
A small percentage of those may actually like it enough to pay for it.
Myself, I'm not going to pay for nor even pirate Assassin's Creed 2.
What does it say when I don't even care enough to show interest in the game for free?Now, the people who make their living convincing the UbiSofts of the world to buy DRM are of course going to try to assume that every pirate represents a lost sale.
"Heck, some of these people would probably have bought a copy for the kids too- so we'll just go ahead and say each pirated copy equals \_1.2\_ lost sales!
That's like a kajillion sales lost!
Give us that cool million dollars, and all those pirated copies will immediately convert back to cold, hard cash!
You'll be RICH!!!
" UbiSoft's decisionmakers have their eyes turn into dollar signs and fork over the million bucks.Then some guys crack the thing in a day.
Does the DRM team give the cool million bucks back if their DRM gets cracked that fast?
I seriously doubt it.
So all UbiSoft really did was lose a million bucks on DRM and annoy their legitimate customers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Machtyn</author>
	<datestamp>1267729020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The other way to make companies realize that the DRM system doesn't work is to write them a letter to the effect of:<p><div class="quote"><p>I would have bought your game, but its DRM system made it a pain to play.  Naturally, I could buy the game and get the crack after a day or a week, but then you would not have learned your lesson.  Therefore, I abstain from buying (and playing) your game.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The other way to make companies realize that the DRM system does n't work is to write them a letter to the effect of : I would have bought your game , but its DRM system made it a pain to play .
Naturally , I could buy the game and get the crack after a day or a week , but then you would not have learned your lesson .
Therefore , I abstain from buying ( and playing ) your game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The other way to make companies realize that the DRM system doesn't work is to write them a letter to the effect of:I would have bought your game, but its DRM system made it a pain to play.
Naturally, I could buy the game and get the crack after a day or a week, but then you would not have learned your lesson.
Therefore, I abstain from buying (and playing) your game.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367410</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>mrbene</author>
	<datestamp>1267725120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that holding a publisher responsible for any <i>specific</i> machine infection is far fetched.
</p><p>However, my proposal is that since DRM exists, there exists a demand for cracks served by semi-legal sites.  This semi-legal source of installable code (which wouldn't exist without DRM) is a contributing factor to <b>overall infections</b>, rather than any specific one.
</p><p>What I'm saying is more "Because sexual urges exist, people are raped."  However, while we can't really do that much about sexual urges, we can do away with the urge to bypass DRM - by eliminating DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that holding a publisher responsible for any specific machine infection is far fetched .
However , my proposal is that since DRM exists , there exists a demand for cracks served by semi-legal sites .
This semi-legal source of installable code ( which would n't exist without DRM ) is a contributing factor to overall infections , rather than any specific one .
What I 'm saying is more " Because sexual urges exist , people are raped .
" However , while we ca n't really do that much about sexual urges , we can do away with the urge to bypass DRM - by eliminating DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that holding a publisher responsible for any specific machine infection is far fetched.
However, my proposal is that since DRM exists, there exists a demand for cracks served by semi-legal sites.
This semi-legal source of installable code (which wouldn't exist without DRM) is a contributing factor to overall infections, rather than any specific one.
What I'm saying is more "Because sexual urges exist, people are raped.
"  However, while we can't really do that much about sexual urges, we can do away with the urge to bypass DRM - by eliminating DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368668</id>
	<title>Very understandable, Skid Row basically had to!</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1267782960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Skid Row had to hurry and come forwards with the crack, if only just to protect their copyright and IP, so they don't their crack abused without permission by UBIsoft like ReLoaded had theirs.</p><p><a href="http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/19/0239227" title="slashdot.org">http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/19/0239227</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Skid Row had to hurry and come forwards with the crack , if only just to protect their copyright and IP , so they do n't their crack abused without permission by UBIsoft like ReLoaded had theirs.http : //games.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 08/07/19/0239227 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Skid Row had to hurry and come forwards with the crack, if only just to protect their copyright and IP, so they don't their crack abused without permission by UBIsoft like ReLoaded had theirs.http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/19/0239227 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368438</id>
	<title>Observation.  No one mentions the name of the game</title>
	<author>upuv</author>
	<datestamp>1267780020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>At the time of writing this.

I scanned all subjects.  Not one actual single mention of the actual game name has been made in the subject lines.  NONE.  72 replies and 1 article and not a single subject with the name of the game.  A couple of acronyms but no names.

However mentions of DRM and variations on DRM are common.

This says something.  Some of the responses are full on rants about DRM.  Interesting piece of social observation I think.  Almost like a mob mentality.  Herds of people charging for a cause that isn't fully defined.

However it is true that this thread is more an extension of the original article.  So one could say this is the giant "I TOLD YOU SO YOU GREEDY SONS OF B@#$@\%". type response.

I still marvel at the fact the people seem to have forgot the subject of the problem.

( hmmmmm. ,  )

P.S.  I personally think this moronic attempt at DRM was a finical Cluster F#$&amp; and will have serious issues for Ubi.  However this post is more about the thread than the subject.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At the time of writing this .
I scanned all subjects .
Not one actual single mention of the actual game name has been made in the subject lines .
NONE. 72 replies and 1 article and not a single subject with the name of the game .
A couple of acronyms but no names .
However mentions of DRM and variations on DRM are common .
This says something .
Some of the responses are full on rants about DRM .
Interesting piece of social observation I think .
Almost like a mob mentality .
Herds of people charging for a cause that is n't fully defined .
However it is true that this thread is more an extension of the original article .
So one could say this is the giant " I TOLD YOU SO YOU GREEDY SONS OF B @ # $ @ \ % " .
type response .
I still marvel at the fact the people seem to have forgot the subject of the problem .
( hmmmmm .
, ) P.S .
I personally think this moronic attempt at DRM was a finical Cluster F # $ &amp; and will have serious issues for Ubi .
However this post is more about the thread than the subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the time of writing this.
I scanned all subjects.
Not one actual single mention of the actual game name has been made in the subject lines.
NONE.  72 replies and 1 article and not a single subject with the name of the game.
A couple of acronyms but no names.
However mentions of DRM and variations on DRM are common.
This says something.
Some of the responses are full on rants about DRM.
Interesting piece of social observation I think.
Almost like a mob mentality.
Herds of people charging for a cause that isn't fully defined.
However it is true that this thread is more an extension of the original article.
So one could say this is the giant "I TOLD YOU SO YOU GREEDY SONS OF B@#$@\%".
type response.
I still marvel at the fact the people seem to have forgot the subject of the problem.
( hmmmmm.
,  )

P.S.
I personally think this moronic attempt at DRM was a finical Cluster F#$&amp; and will have serious issues for Ubi.
However this post is more about the thread than the subject.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366494</id>
	<title>Download it just to piss off Ubi.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to download all the cracked Ubi games just to be a dick.  I'm not even going to play them.  I'll just seed the cracked ones.  Fuck Ubi.  Software Nazi's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to download all the cracked Ubi games just to be a dick .
I 'm not even going to play them .
I 'll just seed the cracked ones .
Fuck Ubi .
Software Nazi 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to download all the cracked Ubi games just to be a dick.
I'm not even going to play them.
I'll just seed the cracked ones.
Fuck Ubi.
Software Nazi's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367816</id>
	<title>Publishers don't like 90\% piracy rates</title>
	<author>judeancodersfront</author>
	<datestamp>1267729140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>anymore than Stardock liked having their demigod servers overran by pirates.

DRM works just fine on PS3 games and many MMOs as well. The problem is ineffective DRM, not the idea itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>anymore than Stardock liked having their demigod servers overran by pirates .
DRM works just fine on PS3 games and many MMOs as well .
The problem is ineffective DRM , not the idea itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anymore than Stardock liked having their demigod servers overran by pirates.
DRM works just fine on PS3 games and many MMOs as well.
The problem is ineffective DRM, not the idea itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</id>
	<title>Human deterrent</title>
	<author>redkazuo</author>
	<datestamp>1267721640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about this DRM:<br>
<br>
1. Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple (read cheap) traditional DRM;<br>
2. Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked, for a year.<br>
<br>
I think they'd have better chances that way. Don't you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this DRM : 1 .
Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple ( read cheap ) traditional DRM ; 2 .
Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked , for a year .
I think they 'd have better chances that way .
Do n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this DRM:

1.
Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple (read cheap) traditional DRM;
2.
Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked, for a year.
I think they'd have better chances that way.
Don't you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367882</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if software had no DRM, people would still be posting free copies to download on pirate sites, and these copies would be infected by malware (and the sites supported by crappy advertising). Also I have no idea how you link spam to it.</p><p>I don't like DRM either but let's not get into ridiculous reasoning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if software had no DRM , people would still be posting free copies to download on pirate sites , and these copies would be infected by malware ( and the sites supported by crappy advertising ) .
Also I have no idea how you link spam to it.I do n't like DRM either but let 's not get into ridiculous reasoning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if software had no DRM, people would still be posting free copies to download on pirate sites, and these copies would be infected by malware (and the sites supported by crappy advertising).
Also I have no idea how you link spam to it.I don't like DRM either but let's not get into ridiculous reasoning.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375208</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1267781520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, most publishers don't see the options as DRM vs no DRM, but as DRM vs "Fuck you, we're only making console games then.  Have fun playing nothing!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , most publishers do n't see the options as DRM vs no DRM , but as DRM vs " Fuck you , we 're only making console games then .
Have fun playing nothing !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, most publishers don't see the options as DRM vs no DRM, but as DRM vs "Fuck you, we're only making console games then.
Have fun playing nothing!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367094</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is, in fact, illegal to download an MP3 that was ripped from a CD you otherwise own. I know it doesn't make sense, but case law says you're only licensed for fair use of that specific copy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is , in fact , illegal to download an MP3 that was ripped from a CD you otherwise own .
I know it does n't make sense , but case law says you 're only licensed for fair use of that specific copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is, in fact, illegal to download an MP3 that was ripped from a CD you otherwise own.
I know it doesn't make sense, but case law says you're only licensed for fair use of that specific copy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372248</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1267810560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your view is the popular one here.  And certainly over restrictive DRM is going to lose customers.  But I think it should be pointed out that you have absolutely no idea how DRM effects sales.  You can't know if someone would just decide to buy a game if they couldn't get a pirated copy.  Just as I can't know if the company didn't use DRM that people would buy the game.  Sure, you can get a few anecdotal things on Slashdot of people claiming they would.  But it really seems that most of the piracy crowd on here are ready to get pissed at anything minor to justify not paying for stuff.<br> <br>Obviously, the claims of game companies losing millions of dollars due to piracy are false.  But you stating that DRM won't cause some people to buy the game that otherwise wouldn't is also garbage.<br> <br>I swear though, every DRM article is the same on here.  Someone needs to just compile all the +5 posts on here and put it in one post.  Slashdot mods the same things up every time despite all the intellectual dishonesty in them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your view is the popular one here .
And certainly over restrictive DRM is going to lose customers .
But I think it should be pointed out that you have absolutely no idea how DRM effects sales .
You ca n't know if someone would just decide to buy a game if they could n't get a pirated copy .
Just as I ca n't know if the company did n't use DRM that people would buy the game .
Sure , you can get a few anecdotal things on Slashdot of people claiming they would .
But it really seems that most of the piracy crowd on here are ready to get pissed at anything minor to justify not paying for stuff .
Obviously , the claims of game companies losing millions of dollars due to piracy are false .
But you stating that DRM wo n't cause some people to buy the game that otherwise would n't is also garbage .
I swear though , every DRM article is the same on here .
Someone needs to just compile all the + 5 posts on here and put it in one post .
Slashdot mods the same things up every time despite all the intellectual dishonesty in them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your view is the popular one here.
And certainly over restrictive DRM is going to lose customers.
But I think it should be pointed out that you have absolutely no idea how DRM effects sales.
You can't know if someone would just decide to buy a game if they couldn't get a pirated copy.
Just as I can't know if the company didn't use DRM that people would buy the game.
Sure, you can get a few anecdotal things on Slashdot of people claiming they would.
But it really seems that most of the piracy crowd on here are ready to get pissed at anything minor to justify not paying for stuff.
Obviously, the claims of game companies losing millions of dollars due to piracy are false.
But you stating that DRM won't cause some people to buy the game that otherwise wouldn't is also garbage.
I swear though, every DRM article is the same on here.
Someone needs to just compile all the +5 posts on here and put it in one post.
Slashdot mods the same things up every time despite all the intellectual dishonesty in them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373368</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.</p></div></blockquote><p>And that's fine.  If they choose to avoid profits (and therefore pay less tax) that's fine with me.  Meanwhile, while they're blaming pirates to lack of profits, a DRM-eschewing competitor's inbvesors are blaming their garage contractor for building something that doesn't fit all their Ferraris, blaming their drug dealer for not bringing nearly enough dope for all the money they're offering, blaming their hookers for only having 3 useful holes, etc.</p><p>Go on with your blame game, Ubisoft.  The <em>real</em> world of business (you know, the kind that is for profit) won't miss you.  You can whine about pirates, but everyone knows your DRM is what costs you the money, and none of your words are going to persuade your money-making competitors.</p><p>Failed businessmen have all sorts of excuses.  This is nothing new.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft can always blame " those damn pirates " and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.And that 's fine .
If they choose to avoid profits ( and therefore pay less tax ) that 's fine with me .
Meanwhile , while they 're blaming pirates to lack of profits , a DRM-eschewing competitor 's inbvesors are blaming their garage contractor for building something that does n't fit all their Ferraris , blaming their drug dealer for not bringing nearly enough dope for all the money they 're offering , blaming their hookers for only having 3 useful holes , etc.Go on with your blame game , Ubisoft .
The real world of business ( you know , the kind that is for profit ) wo n't miss you .
You can whine about pirates , but everyone knows your DRM is what costs you the money , and none of your words are going to persuade your money-making competitors.Failed businessmen have all sorts of excuses .
This is nothing new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.And that's fine.
If they choose to avoid profits (and therefore pay less tax) that's fine with me.
Meanwhile, while they're blaming pirates to lack of profits, a DRM-eschewing competitor's inbvesors are blaming their garage contractor for building something that doesn't fit all their Ferraris, blaming their drug dealer for not bringing nearly enough dope for all the money they're offering, blaming their hookers for only having 3 useful holes, etc.Go on with your blame game, Ubisoft.
The real world of business (you know, the kind that is for profit) won't miss you.
You can whine about pirates, but everyone knows your DRM is what costs you the money, and none of your words are going to persuade your money-making competitors.Failed businessmen have all sorts of excuses.
This is nothing new.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31376740</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>lethalwp</author>
	<datestamp>1267790460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>would you do the same thing to ask for games that run under linux?</p><p>This is nonsense, $$$ is the mighty word, no letters/mails will change that. But in the case of linux, it's even worse: they don't dare/invest porting games to linux, and don't talk to me about games that are 5 years old.</p><p>In the mean time, i got a ps3, never played &amp; bought so many games these last 2 years than in my whole life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>would you do the same thing to ask for games that run under linux ? This is nonsense , $ $ $ is the mighty word , no letters/mails will change that .
But in the case of linux , it 's even worse : they do n't dare/invest porting games to linux , and do n't talk to me about games that are 5 years old.In the mean time , i got a ps3 , never played &amp; bought so many games these last 2 years than in my whole life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>would you do the same thing to ask for games that run under linux?This is nonsense, $$$ is the mighty word, no letters/mails will change that.
But in the case of linux, it's even worse: they don't dare/invest porting games to linux, and don't talk to me about games that are 5 years old.In the mean time, i got a ps3, never played &amp; bought so many games these last 2 years than in my whole life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373968</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft hates Troops</title>
	<author>citizenr</author>
	<datestamp>1267818840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ubisoft hates Troops</p></div><p>its ok, WHOLE WORLD hates US Troops.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft hates Troopsits ok , WHOLE WORLD hates US Troops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft hates Troopsits ok, WHOLE WORLD hates US Troops.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368586</id>
	<title>Re:You must know what this will cause right?</title>
	<author>Mashiki</author>
	<datestamp>1267781940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Good job, Skid-Row! You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it. Congrats.</p></div></blockquote><p>Oh I know I'm replying to a troll but I've got to say this...piracy is a much bigger problem on consoles then on PC's.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good job , Skid-Row !
You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it .
Congrats.Oh I know I 'm replying to a troll but I 've got to say this...piracy is a much bigger problem on consoles then on PC 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good job, Skid-Row!
You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it.
Congrats.Oh I know I'm replying to a troll but I've got to say this...piracy is a much bigger problem on consoles then on PC's.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371230</id>
	<title>anonymous coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267805820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DRM is a response to piracy, not the other way around.  Pirates are to blame for this.  Without increasingly sophisticated DRM these big name single player games would be pirated even more.</p><p>That's the reality.</p><p>PC gaming is suffering, pretty soon the hardcore gamers won't be able to find their shooters and action games at all, that's where the trend is going.</p><p>Games that don't require as much DRM because of the lack of the technical sophistication of the intended audience (casual games) or niche games like the strategy genre where the customers understand they have to pay or have nothing to play at all will be all that's left for the PC.</p><p>PC game pirates, you've only got yourselves to blame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DRM is a response to piracy , not the other way around .
Pirates are to blame for this .
Without increasingly sophisticated DRM these big name single player games would be pirated even more.That 's the reality.PC gaming is suffering , pretty soon the hardcore gamers wo n't be able to find their shooters and action games at all , that 's where the trend is going.Games that do n't require as much DRM because of the lack of the technical sophistication of the intended audience ( casual games ) or niche games like the strategy genre where the customers understand they have to pay or have nothing to play at all will be all that 's left for the PC.PC game pirates , you 've only got yourselves to blame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DRM is a response to piracy, not the other way around.
Pirates are to blame for this.
Without increasingly sophisticated DRM these big name single player games would be pirated even more.That's the reality.PC gaming is suffering, pretty soon the hardcore gamers won't be able to find their shooters and action games at all, that's where the trend is going.Games that don't require as much DRM because of the lack of the technical sophistication of the intended audience (casual games) or niche games like the strategy genre where the customers understand they have to pay or have nothing to play at all will be all that's left for the PC.PC game pirates, you've only got yourselves to blame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367748</id>
	<title>Re:Normally vs. Now</title>
	<author>Paspanique</author>
	<datestamp>1267728480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed... Between this and Activision or EA buying out successful studio to turn them to the dark side or Steam that totally controls your all your games(I got my whole Steam library of games disabled for 2 weeks trying to correct a mistake made by PayPal, which has convinced me to steer clear of steam or the likes or create a new profile for every game)  using it... It's really a wonder how someone keeps on just buying games instead of following the "Easy road". Seems like us legit customer are the ones getting it up. People pirating have such a easy access, it's sickening.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed... Between this and Activision or EA buying out successful studio to turn them to the dark side or Steam that totally controls your all your games ( I got my whole Steam library of games disabled for 2 weeks trying to correct a mistake made by PayPal , which has convinced me to steer clear of steam or the likes or create a new profile for every game ) using it... It 's really a wonder how someone keeps on just buying games instead of following the " Easy road " .
Seems like us legit customer are the ones getting it up .
People pirating have such a easy access , it 's sickening .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed... Between this and Activision or EA buying out successful studio to turn them to the dark side or Steam that totally controls your all your games(I got my whole Steam library of games disabled for 2 weeks trying to correct a mistake made by PayPal, which has convinced me to steer clear of steam or the likes or create a new profile for every game)  using it... It's really a wonder how someone keeps on just buying games instead of following the "Easy road".
Seems like us legit customer are the ones getting it up.
People pirating have such a easy access, it's sickening.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502</id>
	<title>So was Sony stupid for implementing DRM in the PS3</title>
	<author>judeancodersfront</author>
	<datestamp>1267781040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would you have told them that it would be a waste of time?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you have told them that it would be a waste of time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you have told them that it would be a waste of time?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368174</id>
	<title>I was wrong this go around</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1267819860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My predictions were on the first side which was that the DRM would be effective but would basically piss off their users, both legal and not resulting in a pile of disinteresting crap.</p><p>My presumption was based on the presumption that they would do this DRM *right" by making it difficult to crack.  Clearly, they make it not so difficult which I did not expect.  After all, what I expected was that something that was so important to them to be implemented with all the care and diligence as Microsoft's Windows Vista.  You know, that OS no one uses that has DRM up the wazoo where all internal program communications are encrypted to avoid media being ripped through playback and stuff like that?</p><p>Well, I'm going to risk being wrong again by saying that "It's not over yet..."  They will issue an update to the game such that it can't be played without an update being applied or something like that... the update, of course, fixing the problem and/or making it more difficult in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My predictions were on the first side which was that the DRM would be effective but would basically piss off their users , both legal and not resulting in a pile of disinteresting crap.My presumption was based on the presumption that they would do this DRM * right " by making it difficult to crack .
Clearly , they make it not so difficult which I did not expect .
After all , what I expected was that something that was so important to them to be implemented with all the care and diligence as Microsoft 's Windows Vista .
You know , that OS no one uses that has DRM up the wazoo where all internal program communications are encrypted to avoid media being ripped through playback and stuff like that ? Well , I 'm going to risk being wrong again by saying that " It 's not over yet... " They will issue an update to the game such that it ca n't be played without an update being applied or something like that... the update , of course , fixing the problem and/or making it more difficult in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My predictions were on the first side which was that the DRM would be effective but would basically piss off their users, both legal and not resulting in a pile of disinteresting crap.My presumption was based on the presumption that they would do this DRM *right" by making it difficult to crack.
Clearly, they make it not so difficult which I did not expect.
After all, what I expected was that something that was so important to them to be implemented with all the care and diligence as Microsoft's Windows Vista.
You know, that OS no one uses that has DRM up the wazoo where all internal program communications are encrypted to avoid media being ripped through playback and stuff like that?Well, I'm going to risk being wrong again by saying that "It's not over yet..."  They will issue an update to the game such that it can't be played without an update being applied or something like that... the update, of course, fixing the problem and/or making it more difficult in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369586</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267794840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except that the second one is never going to happen, and that in the first case, they will die in the long run.</p><p>So in other words, <em>they</em> are boned either way. ^^</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that the second one is never going to happen , and that in the first case , they will die in the long run.So in other words , they are boned either way .
^ ^</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that the second one is never going to happen, and that in the first case, they will die in the long run.So in other words, they are boned either way.
^^</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374184</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Skychrono</author>
	<datestamp>1267819740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What you said was amazingly insightful to me.

There are three types of people. Honest people that'll always buy games. Pirates. And people that become pirates if there's no DRM at all. Since we will never stop a Pirate, you should worry about the third category. Disc-check DRM is all that we really need. (With an optional, more complex Steam style validation for netbooks or people that hate discs)

For the record, I'm pro-DRM, for the purpose of protecting works, but against most current implementations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What you said was amazingly insightful to me .
There are three types of people .
Honest people that 'll always buy games .
Pirates. And people that become pirates if there 's no DRM at all .
Since we will never stop a Pirate , you should worry about the third category .
Disc-check DRM is all that we really need .
( With an optional , more complex Steam style validation for netbooks or people that hate discs ) For the record , I 'm pro-DRM , for the purpose of protecting works , but against most current implementations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you said was amazingly insightful to me.
There are three types of people.
Honest people that'll always buy games.
Pirates. And people that become pirates if there's no DRM at all.
Since we will never stop a Pirate, you should worry about the third category.
Disc-check DRM is all that we really need.
(With an optional, more complex Steam style validation for netbooks or people that hate discs)

For the record, I'm pro-DRM, for the purpose of protecting works, but against most current implementations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Andorin</author>
	<datestamp>1267720560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you buy it, you are supporting UbiSoft. You are supporting their game development team, which may be good, but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology. They will only be reporting on sales to their managers, and if they can spin a story that their decisions, including the DRM, resulted in higher sales, they'll get a pat on the back and a "jolly good, carry on."</p></div></blockquote><p>
So if they release a game with nasty DRM and sales tank, they blame the sales on "piracy" and justify that as an excuse to toughen up the DRM.<br>
<br>
If they release a game with nasty DRM and sales soar, or even remain steadyish, they assume that the DRM magically converted pirated copies into actual sales, and toughen up the DRM in the hopes that this trend continues.<br>
<br>
In other words, we're boned either way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you buy it , you are supporting UbiSoft .
You are supporting their game development team , which may be good , but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology .
They will only be reporting on sales to their managers , and if they can spin a story that their decisions , including the DRM , resulted in higher sales , they 'll get a pat on the back and a " jolly good , carry on .
" So if they release a game with nasty DRM and sales tank , they blame the sales on " piracy " and justify that as an excuse to toughen up the DRM .
If they release a game with nasty DRM and sales soar , or even remain steadyish , they assume that the DRM magically converted pirated copies into actual sales , and toughen up the DRM in the hopes that this trend continues .
In other words , we 're boned either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you buy it, you are supporting UbiSoft.
You are supporting their game development team, which may be good, but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology.
They will only be reporting on sales to their managers, and if they can spin a story that their decisions, including the DRM, resulted in higher sales, they'll get a pat on the back and a "jolly good, carry on.
"
So if they release a game with nasty DRM and sales tank, they blame the sales on "piracy" and justify that as an excuse to toughen up the DRM.
If they release a game with nasty DRM and sales soar, or even remain steadyish, they assume that the DRM magically converted pirated copies into actual sales, and toughen up the DRM in the hopes that this trend continues.
In other words, we're boned either way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368170</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1267819680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.  If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.  A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.</p></div><p>What, you honestly think a single one of them is going to go to "Looks like we fucked up with the DRM" when "Those damn pirates got us again!" is available for them to shift the blame to? You think the fact that it probably isn't true means a damn?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go .
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that are n't matched by rising piracy figures , then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate , and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase .
A pirate does n't interest them , but a lost customer does.What , you honestly think a single one of them is going to go to " Looks like we fucked up with the DRM " when " Those damn pirates got us again !
" is available for them to shift the blame to ?
You think the fact that it probably is n't true means a damn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.
A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.What, you honestly think a single one of them is going to go to "Looks like we fucked up with the DRM" when "Those damn pirates got us again!
" is available for them to shift the blame to?
You think the fact that it probably isn't true means a damn?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367100</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Lehk228</author>
	<datestamp>1267722840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>when was the last time DRM prevented a game from being available to pirate?</htmltext>
<tokenext>when was the last time DRM prevented a game from being available to pirate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when was the last time DRM prevented a game from being available to pirate?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368036</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267731840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Try to fight lost revenue by giving money away.<br>2. ???<br>3. Profit..?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Try to fight lost revenue by giving money away.2 .
? ? ? 3. Profit.. ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Try to fight lost revenue by giving money away.2.
???3. Profit..?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370566</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>hansamurai</author>
	<datestamp>1267802400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Positech Games, the guy posts on Slashdot too.</p><p><a href="http://positech.co.uk/" title="positech.co.uk">http://positech.co.uk/</a> [positech.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Positech Games , the guy posts on Slashdot too.http : //positech.co.uk/ [ positech.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Positech Games, the guy posts on Slashdot too.http://positech.co.uk/ [positech.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367270</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Your.Master</author>
	<datestamp>1267724100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It depends how you define DRM.  The updates require a unique serial number.  Used copies are unsupported.  Installing from their store requires activation and signature validation from an internet-connected machine.</p><p>Even then, one game that is successful despite no DRM doesn't by itself invalidate the idea that DRM helps profitability.  Who knows what Galciv2's sales would have looked like with bad DRM.  Higher?  Lower?  We can speculate but we can't know.</p><p>The funny thing is, we can change the answer.  The number one way you can manipulate the answer is by buying non-DRM games and neither buying nor pirating DRM games.  One example not all that informative, but if we establish a consistent pattern of DRM --&gt; profit inverse correlations, that says something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends how you define DRM .
The updates require a unique serial number .
Used copies are unsupported .
Installing from their store requires activation and signature validation from an internet-connected machine.Even then , one game that is successful despite no DRM does n't by itself invalidate the idea that DRM helps profitability .
Who knows what Galciv2 's sales would have looked like with bad DRM .
Higher ? Lower ?
We can speculate but we ca n't know.The funny thing is , we can change the answer .
The number one way you can manipulate the answer is by buying non-DRM games and neither buying nor pirating DRM games .
One example not all that informative , but if we establish a consistent pattern of DRM -- &gt; profit inverse correlations , that says something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends how you define DRM.
The updates require a unique serial number.
Used copies are unsupported.
Installing from their store requires activation and signature validation from an internet-connected machine.Even then, one game that is successful despite no DRM doesn't by itself invalidate the idea that DRM helps profitability.
Who knows what Galciv2's sales would have looked like with bad DRM.
Higher?  Lower?
We can speculate but we can't know.The funny thing is, we can change the answer.
The number one way you can manipulate the answer is by buying non-DRM games and neither buying nor pirating DRM games.
One example not all that informative, but if we establish a consistent pattern of DRM --&gt; profit inverse correlations, that says something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371564</id>
	<title>ubisoft devs == stupid?</title>
	<author>Surt</author>
	<datestamp>1267807380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The way to make an online system uncrackable seems totally straightforward, I wonder if the developers are stupid or they weren't willing to make secure DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The way to make an online system uncrackable seems totally straightforward , I wonder if the developers are stupid or they were n't willing to make secure DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way to make an online system uncrackable seems totally straightforward, I wonder if the developers are stupid or they weren't willing to make secure DRM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267782360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You, sir, are a moron.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?</p></div><p>None, they'll just get it with the game itself.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Then scan it for trojans? (Believe me most copies will have one.)</p></div><p>Look for the comments attached to the release, it'll tell you everything you need to know.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And then install it from the cryptic readme text file? I'm talking non-geeks.</p></div><p>People are not retards. By their second game, they'll know what "copy cracked exe over the original one" means.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm talking non-geeks. People who send their PCs to the geek squad. People who've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit. You know, the other 99.7\% of the user base.</p></div><p>Irrelevant, they'll have geek friends. Sure, I have friends I'd rather trust with a house plant than a computer, but who the fuck are you to tell them they can't play with games they've already downloaded? (Mind you, in this country, it's legit for personal use.)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers.</p></div><p>No, it works on the majority of their <i>customers</i>. Everyone else just gets it already cracked.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If DRM causes the company to lose 10\% of their base but pickup a new 11\%, they don't care.</p></div><p>DRM won't ever get you new sales. The game will, if it's good and/or marketed enough.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You , sir , are a moron.How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ? None , they 'll just get it with the game itself.Then scan it for trojans ?
( Believe me most copies will have one .
) Look for the comments attached to the release , it 'll tell you everything you need to know.And then install it from the cryptic readme text file ?
I 'm talking non-geeks.People are not retards .
By their second game , they 'll know what " copy cracked exe over the original one " means.I 'm talking non-geeks .
People who send their PCs to the geek squad .
People who 've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit .
You know , the other 99.7 \ % of the user base.Irrelevant , they 'll have geek friends .
Sure , I have friends I 'd rather trust with a house plant than a computer , but who the fuck are you to tell them they ca n't play with games they 've already downloaded ?
( Mind you , in this country , it 's legit for personal use .
) They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers.No , it works on the majority of their customers .
Everyone else just gets it already cracked.If DRM causes the company to lose 10 \ % of their base but pickup a new 11 \ % , they do n't care.DRM wo n't ever get you new sales .
The game will , if it 's good and/or marketed enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You, sir, are a moron.How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?None, they'll just get it with the game itself.Then scan it for trojans?
(Believe me most copies will have one.
)Look for the comments attached to the release, it'll tell you everything you need to know.And then install it from the cryptic readme text file?
I'm talking non-geeks.People are not retards.
By their second game, they'll know what "copy cracked exe over the original one" means.I'm talking non-geeks.
People who send their PCs to the geek squad.
People who've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit.
You know, the other 99.7\% of the user base.Irrelevant, they'll have geek friends.
Sure, I have friends I'd rather trust with a house plant than a computer, but who the fuck are you to tell them they can't play with games they've already downloaded?
(Mind you, in this country, it's legit for personal use.
)They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers.No, it works on the majority of their customers.
Everyone else just gets it already cracked.If DRM causes the company to lose 10\% of their base but pickup a new 11\%, they don't care.DRM won't ever get you new sales.
The game will, if it's good and/or marketed enough.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367386</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EA has very lenient DRM, I believe.</p><p>Also Ubisoft's past title, Prince of Persia, released without any copy protection to much fanfare. I imagine that was a disaster sales-wise, and now they'd rather have the DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EA has very lenient DRM , I believe.Also Ubisoft 's past title , Prince of Persia , released without any copy protection to much fanfare .
I imagine that was a disaster sales-wise , and now they 'd rather have the DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EA has very lenient DRM, I believe.Also Ubisoft's past title, Prince of Persia, released without any copy protection to much fanfare.
I imagine that was a disaster sales-wise, and now they'd rather have the DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370812</id>
	<title>Re:So was Sony stupid for implementing DRM in the</title>
	<author>Boldoran</author>
	<datestamp>1267803840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except DRM on the PS3 does not screw over your normal customers and make the pirated game the supperior version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except DRM on the PS3 does not screw over your normal customers and make the pirated game the supperior version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except DRM on the PS3 does not screw over your normal customers and make the pirated game the supperior version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372342</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>redkazuo</author>
	<datestamp>1267810980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That sounds true, and added to the fact it seems like it only takes one fool to ruin it for everybody, it may look like a terrible idea.</p><p>But look, the point is that most people have some close person who had cancer. Maybe the crackers had/have someone with cancer in their family. They'd probably reconsider going public. If we're in any luck, someone along the chain will.</p><p>It sounds too risky, but I'm serious. If it goes wrong in the first week Ubisoft hasn't spent much at all. And, like imakemusic said, they still would have bragging rights. Oh, and look at them now.</p><p>Finally, think of the effect on the media and the crackers' own supporters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That sounds true , and added to the fact it seems like it only takes one fool to ruin it for everybody , it may look like a terrible idea.But look , the point is that most people have some close person who had cancer .
Maybe the crackers had/have someone with cancer in their family .
They 'd probably reconsider going public .
If we 're in any luck , someone along the chain will.It sounds too risky , but I 'm serious .
If it goes wrong in the first week Ubisoft has n't spent much at all .
And , like imakemusic said , they still would have bragging rights .
Oh , and look at them now.Finally , think of the effect on the media and the crackers ' own supporters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That sounds true, and added to the fact it seems like it only takes one fool to ruin it for everybody, it may look like a terrible idea.But look, the point is that most people have some close person who had cancer.
Maybe the crackers had/have someone with cancer in their family.
They'd probably reconsider going public.
If we're in any luck, someone along the chain will.It sounds too risky, but I'm serious.
If it goes wrong in the first week Ubisoft hasn't spent much at all.
And, like imakemusic said, they still would have bragging rights.
Oh, and look at them now.Finally, think of the effect on the media and the crackers' own supporters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31376822</id>
	<title>Why do they do this to themselves?</title>
	<author>pugugly</author>
	<datestamp>1267791000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To (probably mis)quote Scott Adams "Well, that didn't take long, even for here"</p><p>Pug</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To ( probably mis ) quote Scott Adams " Well , that did n't take long , even for here " Pug</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To (probably mis)quote Scott Adams "Well, that didn't take long, even for here"Pug
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366864</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267721340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.</p></div><p>Evil begets evil.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam , botnets , and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.Evil begets evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.Evil begets evil.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367302</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>DMalic</author>
	<datestamp>1267724280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No.  The problem is that you're not relying on the average person, or even most people, to be honest.  You're relying on the most sociopathic immoral uncaring bastard of a cracker to refrain from cracking the game.  That's destined to failure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
The problem is that you 're not relying on the average person , or even most people , to be honest .
You 're relying on the most sociopathic immoral uncaring bastard of a cracker to refrain from cracking the game .
That 's destined to failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
The problem is that you're not relying on the average person, or even most people, to be honest.
You're relying on the most sociopathic immoral uncaring bastard of a cracker to refrain from cracking the game.
That's destined to failure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367830</id>
	<title>Great, but Assassin's Creed II is still broken</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well I'm glad that game is cracked but some of us people who actually bought Assassin's Creed II have gotten the short straw.</p><p>This is as far as I get into the game when I try to play it on PC:<br>http://i.imgur.com/iEfwF.jpg</p><p>To make matters worse I can't return the game because it's already been associated with my account and Ubisoft's "customer service" doesn't respond to any service request.</p><p>I'm sure it's a great game but I doubt I will be able to play it until a crack is out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I 'm glad that game is cracked but some of us people who actually bought Assassin 's Creed II have gotten the short straw.This is as far as I get into the game when I try to play it on PC : http : //i.imgur.com/iEfwF.jpgTo make matters worse I ca n't return the game because it 's already been associated with my account and Ubisoft 's " customer service " does n't respond to any service request.I 'm sure it 's a great game but I doubt I will be able to play it until a crack is out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I'm glad that game is cracked but some of us people who actually bought Assassin's Creed II have gotten the short straw.This is as far as I get into the game when I try to play it on PC:http://i.imgur.com/iEfwF.jpgTo make matters worse I can't return the game because it's already been associated with my account and Ubisoft's "customer service" doesn't respond to any service request.I'm sure it's a great game but I doubt I will be able to play it until a crack is out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226</id>
	<title>Ubisoft claims it lacks features.</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1267820460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubisoft claims it lacks features.<br>For instance, the cracked version lacks the requirement for a continuous online connection.<br>The cracked version lacks the occasional lag caused by the internet connection, nor does the cracked version have the feature where the game gets useless when Ubisoft shuts down their servers.<br>It also lacks all other DRM available in the original game.<br>So yeah, the pirate version is lacking features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft claims it lacks features.For instance , the cracked version lacks the requirement for a continuous online connection.The cracked version lacks the occasional lag caused by the internet connection , nor does the cracked version have the feature where the game gets useless when Ubisoft shuts down their servers.It also lacks all other DRM available in the original game.So yeah , the pirate version is lacking features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft claims it lacks features.For instance, the cracked version lacks the requirement for a continuous online connection.The cracked version lacks the occasional lag caused by the internet connection, nor does the cracked version have the feature where the game gets useless when Ubisoft shuts down their servers.It also lacks all other DRM available in the original game.So yeah, the pirate version is lacking features.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371402</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what I want to know.</p><p>The DRM schemes they have don't do anything but keep honest people honest, a disk check is enough for most honest people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what I want to know.The DRM schemes they have do n't do anything but keep honest people honest , a disk check is enough for most honest people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what I want to know.The DRM schemes they have don't do anything but keep honest people honest, a disk check is enough for most honest people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370072</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1267799460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You know, it's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way. I mean, now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game, and everyone's basically implying that, if it wasn't for the DRM, it'd be a really awesome game, that everyone wants to play, and if no-one wants to play it, why is everyone talking about it?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I hope you don't work in marketing if that's your idea of a good marketing campaign.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , it 's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way .
I mean , now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game , and everyone 's basically implying that , if it was n't for the DRM , it 'd be a really awesome game , that everyone wants to play , and if no-one wants to play it , why is everyone talking about it ?
I hope you do n't work in marketing if that 's your idea of a good marketing campaign .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, it's possible that DRM is a sort of viral marketing campaign in a way.
I mean, now everyone knows Ubisoft has just released a new game, and everyone's basically implying that, if it wasn't for the DRM, it'd be a really awesome game, that everyone wants to play, and if no-one wants to play it, why is everyone talking about it?
I hope you don't work in marketing if that's your idea of a good marketing campaign.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368374</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Cee</author>
	<datestamp>1267822320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How about this DRM:<br>1. Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple (read cheap) traditional DRM;<br>2. Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked, for a year.<br>I think they'd have better chances that way. Don't you?</p></div><p>Not really.<br>First, why not just release the software with no DRM at all and just require that the software never gets shared on the pirate bay in order to donate to this charity?<br>Second, Ubisoft would in some ways takes the cancer research organization as hostage. Basically Ubisoft would say: "you might not like us, but do you really want people to get cancer? Then don't pirate our games." They could actually just donate the money no matter what instead.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this DRM : 1 .
Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple ( read cheap ) traditional DRM ; 2 .
Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked , for a year.I think they 'd have better chances that way .
Do n't you ? Not really.First , why not just release the software with no DRM at all and just require that the software never gets shared on the pirate bay in order to donate to this charity ? Second , Ubisoft would in some ways takes the cancer research organization as hostage .
Basically Ubisoft would say : " you might not like us , but do you really want people to get cancer ?
Then do n't pirate our games .
" They could actually just donate the money no matter what instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this DRM:1.
Ubisoft creates a reasonably simple (read cheap) traditional DRM;2.
Ubisoft promises to donate five thousand dollars to cancer research for each day the game goes without being cracked, for a year.I think they'd have better chances that way.
Don't you?Not really.First, why not just release the software with no DRM at all and just require that the software never gets shared on the pirate bay in order to donate to this charity?Second, Ubisoft would in some ways takes the cancer research organization as hostage.
Basically Ubisoft would say: "you might not like us, but do you really want people to get cancer?
Then don't pirate our games.
" They could actually just donate the money no matter what instead.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367524</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1267726200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except that with enough people boycotting due to DRM (and while publicly the companies will lie and say it's pirates costing them sales, not boycotts), eventually the companies will go bankrupt.  Then the people who make the new companies to take over will be well aware that DRM caused the demise of the predecessors and they will avoid such mistakes if they hope to stay in business more than 5 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that with enough people boycotting due to DRM ( and while publicly the companies will lie and say it 's pirates costing them sales , not boycotts ) , eventually the companies will go bankrupt .
Then the people who make the new companies to take over will be well aware that DRM caused the demise of the predecessors and they will avoid such mistakes if they hope to stay in business more than 5 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that with enough people boycotting due to DRM (and while publicly the companies will lie and say it's pirates costing them sales, not boycotts), eventually the companies will go bankrupt.
Then the people who make the new companies to take over will be well aware that DRM caused the demise of the predecessors and they will avoid such mistakes if they hope to stay in business more than 5 years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368692</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>mok000</author>
	<datestamp>1267783260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who's talking about blame?</p><p>DRM is more like forcing women to wear a chastity belt, but everyone who has paid you for a key can rape them...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who 's talking about blame ? DRM is more like forcing women to wear a chastity belt , but everyone who has paid you for a key can rape them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who's talking about blame?DRM is more like forcing women to wear a chastity belt, but everyone who has paid you for a key can rape them...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367234</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>somanyrobots</author>
	<datestamp>1267723920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't have mod points atm, or I'd do it myself, but mod parent up for interesting.  I like the idea; I wish there were any way it would ever happen, but (whether you're joking or not) it's a cool thing to think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't have mod points atm , or I 'd do it myself , but mod parent up for interesting .
I like the idea ; I wish there were any way it would ever happen , but ( whether you 're joking or not ) it 's a cool thing to think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't have mod points atm, or I'd do it myself, but mod parent up for interesting.
I like the idea; I wish there were any way it would ever happen, but (whether you're joking or not) it's a cool thing to think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367696</id>
	<title>NSA, KGB, CIA, MI5, GCHQ, MSS, CSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267728000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>America's National Security Agency, Russia's Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti, America's Central Intelligence Agency, Britain's Military Intelligence section 5, Britain's Government Communications Headquarters, Chinas Ministry of State Security, Canada's Communications Security Establishment, and more countries spook houses all have cryptography branches with acres of computers dedicated to cracking codes.  Each others codes, usually.  And they hire cryptographers, statisticians, computer scientists, and engineers to keep the state of the art, and they spend millions in taxpayers currency to do it.  And for all of their efforts, and all of their equipment, the H&#228;xor  $K!d r0w, !&#241;t3r&#241;3t &#169;0&#241;&#241;3&#169;t3d gr0up 0f !&#241;f0rm4l !&#241;d!v!du4l$ &#169;4&#241; r!p tHr0ugH 3&#241;&#169;r&yen;pt!0&#241; 4&#241;d br34K !t 4t l34$t 4$ f4$t 4$ l4rg3 g0v3r&#241;m3&#241;t$, 4&#241;d &#169;3rt4!&#241;l&yen; tH0u$4&#241;d$ 0f t!m3$ f4$t3r tH4&#241; 4&#241;&yen; &#169;0mp4&#241;&yen; 0r &#169;0&#241;gl0m3r4t3.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>America 's National Security Agency , Russia 's Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti , America 's Central Intelligence Agency , Britain 's Military Intelligence section 5 , Britain 's Government Communications Headquarters , Chinas Ministry of State Security , Canada 's Communications Security Establishment , and more countries spook houses all have cryptography branches with acres of computers dedicated to cracking codes .
Each others codes , usually .
And they hire cryptographers , statisticians , computer scientists , and engineers to keep the state of the art , and they spend millions in taxpayers currency to do it .
And for all of their efforts , and all of their equipment , the H   xor $ K ! d r0w , !   t3r   3t   0     3   t3d gr0up 0f !   f0rm4l !   d ! v ! du4l $   4   r ! p tHr0ugH 3     r   pt ! 0   4   d br34K ! t 4t l34 $ t 4 $ f4 $ t 4 $ l4rg3 g0v3r   m3   t $ , 4   d   3rt4 !   l   tH0u $ 4   d $ 0f t ! m3 $ f4 $ t3r tH4   4       0mp4     0r   0   gl0m3r4t3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>America's National Security Agency, Russia's Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti, America's Central Intelligence Agency, Britain's Military Intelligence section 5, Britain's Government Communications Headquarters, Chinas Ministry of State Security, Canada's Communications Security Establishment, and more countries spook houses all have cryptography branches with acres of computers dedicated to cracking codes.
Each others codes, usually.
And they hire cryptographers, statisticians, computer scientists, and engineers to keep the state of the art, and they spend millions in taxpayers currency to do it.
And for all of their efforts, and all of their equipment, the Häxor  $K!d r0w, !ñt3rñ3t ©0ññ3©t3d gr0up 0f !ñf0rm4l !ñd!v!du4l$ ©4ñ r!p tHr0ugH 3ñ©r¥pt!0ñ 4ñd br34K !t 4t l34$t 4$ f4$t 4$ l4rg3 g0v3rñm3ñt$, 4ñd ©3rt4!ñl¥ tH0u$4ñd$ 0f t!m3$ f4$t3r tH4ñ 4ñ¥ ©0mp4ñ¥ 0r ©0ñgl0m3r4t3.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</id>
	<title>You're all dicks</title>
	<author>rxan</author>
	<datestamp>1267721400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Developers: Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems!</p><p>Management: I don't know about this...</p><p>Pirates: Awesome! We can steal the game and play it for free with no problems!</p><p>Customers... Oh, too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.</p><p>Management: Developers, I'm sorry, but our last game didn't make any ROI so you're all fired.</p><p>Developers: We should have used DRM...</p><p>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any. Pirating is far too widespread. For every person who pirates a game, less games are made for the PC for this very reason. Pirates blame the developers for using DRM, the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers, yet the pirates are the one to blame.</p><p>Stop trying to spin the argument, pirates. You're the very reason that this shit happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Developers : Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems ! Management : I do n't know about this...Pirates : Awesome !
We can steal the game and play it for free with no problems ! Customers... Oh , too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.Management : Developers , I 'm sorry , but our last game did n't make any ROI so you 're all fired.Developers : We should have used DRM...I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any .
Pirating is far too widespread .
For every person who pirates a game , less games are made for the PC for this very reason .
Pirates blame the developers for using DRM , the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers , yet the pirates are the one to blame.Stop trying to spin the argument , pirates .
You 're the very reason that this shit happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Developers: Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems!Management: I don't know about this...Pirates: Awesome!
We can steal the game and play it for free with no problems!Customers... Oh, too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.Management: Developers, I'm sorry, but our last game didn't make any ROI so you're all fired.Developers: We should have used DRM...I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.
Pirating is far too widespread.
For every person who pirates a game, less games are made for the PC for this very reason.
Pirates blame the developers for using DRM, the quality of the game is reduced for actual customers, yet the pirates are the one to blame.Stop trying to spin the argument, pirates.
You're the very reason that this shit happens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372492</id>
	<title>Paradox Interactive</title>
	<author>Agent0013</author>
	<datestamp>1267811880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I went to the site of Paradox Interactive to see what they have and I find that they made the Penumbra series. Those are nice games. Kind of a puzzle first person. Lots of eerie quiet sneaking. Not a lot of fighting. I guess I am a customer of them and didn't even know it. The games were very easy to download and install, so that is cool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to the site of Paradox Interactive to see what they have and I find that they made the Penumbra series .
Those are nice games .
Kind of a puzzle first person .
Lots of eerie quiet sneaking .
Not a lot of fighting .
I guess I am a customer of them and did n't even know it .
The games were very easy to download and install , so that is cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to the site of Paradox Interactive to see what they have and I find that they made the Penumbra series.
Those are nice games.
Kind of a puzzle first person.
Lots of eerie quiet sneaking.
Not a lot of fighting.
I guess I am a customer of them and didn't even know it.
The games were very easy to download and install, so that is cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368712</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267783560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the flaw with your reasoning... NO company knows true piracy figures, they guess.  Care to take a whack at what they use for their base for their guess?  You got it... how much sales have declined.</p><p>Software companies, movie companies, music companies all do the same thing.  They can't reliably come up with a true # of how many pirated copies are out there, they can't know how many unique people are playing a pirated copy, and they can't know (even if they could reliably track how many times a file was downloaded in aggregate through say bittorrent) how many times someone was re-downloading something they'd already downloaded and either deleted or had a bad file or some other reason.</p><p>So they look at their sales decline, and while they may or may not attribute 100\% of their sales decline to piracy, they do attribute a very large percentage of it to piracy.</p><p>While they may be right or at least in the ballpark, the reality is that with an expected popular game, if it tanked in sales, even if the reality was that very little piracy was happening and people just weren't playing it, all that lost sales revenue would STILL get blamed on piracy.  Because after all, it was expected to be a major hit, it couldn't possibly be people got pissed off at DRM, lazy coding, bugs up the wazoo, publishers like EA shoving titles out the door before they're ready, business practices or reputation of the devs or publisher, or anything else... it HAS to be because of piracy right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the flaw with your reasoning... NO company knows true piracy figures , they guess .
Care to take a whack at what they use for their base for their guess ?
You got it... how much sales have declined.Software companies , movie companies , music companies all do the same thing .
They ca n't reliably come up with a true # of how many pirated copies are out there , they ca n't know how many unique people are playing a pirated copy , and they ca n't know ( even if they could reliably track how many times a file was downloaded in aggregate through say bittorrent ) how many times someone was re-downloading something they 'd already downloaded and either deleted or had a bad file or some other reason.So they look at their sales decline , and while they may or may not attribute 100 \ % of their sales decline to piracy , they do attribute a very large percentage of it to piracy.While they may be right or at least in the ballpark , the reality is that with an expected popular game , if it tanked in sales , even if the reality was that very little piracy was happening and people just were n't playing it , all that lost sales revenue would STILL get blamed on piracy .
Because after all , it was expected to be a major hit , it could n't possibly be people got pissed off at DRM , lazy coding , bugs up the wazoo , publishers like EA shoving titles out the door before they 're ready , business practices or reputation of the devs or publisher , or anything else... it HAS to be because of piracy right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the flaw with your reasoning... NO company knows true piracy figures, they guess.
Care to take a whack at what they use for their base for their guess?
You got it... how much sales have declined.Software companies, movie companies, music companies all do the same thing.
They can't reliably come up with a true # of how many pirated copies are out there, they can't know how many unique people are playing a pirated copy, and they can't know (even if they could reliably track how many times a file was downloaded in aggregate through say bittorrent) how many times someone was re-downloading something they'd already downloaded and either deleted or had a bad file or some other reason.So they look at their sales decline, and while they may or may not attribute 100\% of their sales decline to piracy, they do attribute a very large percentage of it to piracy.While they may be right or at least in the ballpark, the reality is that with an expected popular game, if it tanked in sales, even if the reality was that very little piracy was happening and people just weren't playing it, all that lost sales revenue would STILL get blamed on piracy.
Because after all, it was expected to be a major hit, it couldn't possibly be people got pissed off at DRM, lazy coding, bugs up the wazoo, publishers like EA shoving titles out the door before they're ready, business practices or reputation of the devs or publisher, or anything else... it HAS to be because of piracy right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369092</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>JCZwart</author>
	<datestamp>1267788660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack? Then scan it for trojans?</p></div><p>Google/torrent the hack? Not many. Google/torrent the entire hacked game? Many more, perhaps just as many as who torrent brand new movies. </p><p>Scan it for trojans? Not very many, they'll just install the trojan as well. That's your regular user: why think intelligently when there's no apparent need? Another reason for game publishers to not go that way: do not feed the bot nets...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ?
Then scan it for trojans ? Google/torrent the hack ?
Not many .
Google/torrent the entire hacked game ?
Many more , perhaps just as many as who torrent brand new movies .
Scan it for trojans ?
Not very many , they 'll just install the trojan as well .
That 's your regular user : why think intelligently when there 's no apparent need ?
Another reason for game publishers to not go that way : do not feed the bot nets.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?
Then scan it for trojans?Google/torrent the hack?
Not many.
Google/torrent the entire hacked game?
Many more, perhaps just as many as who torrent brand new movies.
Scan it for trojans?
Not very many, they'll just install the trojan as well.
That's your regular user: why think intelligently when there's no apparent need?
Another reason for game publishers to not go that way: do not feed the bot nets...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369954</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267798440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with your arguement lies in the phrase "piracy figures".</p><p>There are no "piracy figures".  There never will be any "piracy figures". It's impossible for them to get even a rough number for how may games people pirate.</p><p>Even worse, not every pirated game results in a lost sale.  Some people buy the games they like, others don't even play all the games they pirate.  Moreover, some people just would never bother) to buy a game.</p><p>I got a free monster energy drink the other day.  I drank it.  If it wasn't free, I would not have bought one.</p><p>In the end, these companies compare their lost sales to what some mystical value they believe they deserve.  The difference (roughly a hojillion dollars) is money lost to piracy.</p><p>Boycotting a game just makes them inflate the "damage" of piracy even more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with your arguement lies in the phrase " piracy figures " .There are no " piracy figures " .
There never will be any " piracy figures " .
It 's impossible for them to get even a rough number for how may games people pirate.Even worse , not every pirated game results in a lost sale .
Some people buy the games they like , others do n't even play all the games they pirate .
Moreover , some people just would never bother ) to buy a game.I got a free monster energy drink the other day .
I drank it .
If it was n't free , I would not have bought one.In the end , these companies compare their lost sales to what some mystical value they believe they deserve .
The difference ( roughly a hojillion dollars ) is money lost to piracy.Boycotting a game just makes them inflate the " damage " of piracy even more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with your arguement lies in the phrase "piracy figures".There are no "piracy figures".
There never will be any "piracy figures".
It's impossible for them to get even a rough number for how may games people pirate.Even worse, not every pirated game results in a lost sale.
Some people buy the games they like, others don't even play all the games they pirate.
Moreover, some people just would never bother) to buy a game.I got a free monster energy drink the other day.
I drank it.
If it wasn't free, I would not have bought one.In the end, these companies compare their lost sales to what some mystical value they believe they deserve.
The difference (roughly a hojillion dollars) is money lost to piracy.Boycotting a game just makes them inflate the "damage" of piracy even more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367638</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubisoft shipped Prince of Persia sans DRM last year (and without a disk check, I think).Their current behavior shows how well that worked out.</p><p>Really, people pirate games whether or not there is DRM, and piracy is much easier on the PC than it is on consoles. This fact alone is making major developers move away from publishing PC games (as evidenced by these crazy DRM schemes which alienate gamers). Unless things like OnLive become a hit (and this will curb PC game piracy) I can't imaging major conglomerates publishing non-crippled games on the PC. This will eventually leave indie developers alone on the PC, which really isn't all that bad since indie devs are responsible for much of the innovation in gaming.</p><p>Ultimately, shipping games without DRM is suited for indie devs who want exposure in the community, but it makes little sense for major developers who already have the exposure and probably have little incentive to develop games outside of making some coin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft shipped Prince of Persia sans DRM last year ( and without a disk check , I think ) .Their current behavior shows how well that worked out.Really , people pirate games whether or not there is DRM , and piracy is much easier on the PC than it is on consoles .
This fact alone is making major developers move away from publishing PC games ( as evidenced by these crazy DRM schemes which alienate gamers ) .
Unless things like OnLive become a hit ( and this will curb PC game piracy ) I ca n't imaging major conglomerates publishing non-crippled games on the PC .
This will eventually leave indie developers alone on the PC , which really is n't all that bad since indie devs are responsible for much of the innovation in gaming.Ultimately , shipping games without DRM is suited for indie devs who want exposure in the community , but it makes little sense for major developers who already have the exposure and probably have little incentive to develop games outside of making some coin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft shipped Prince of Persia sans DRM last year (and without a disk check, I think).Their current behavior shows how well that worked out.Really, people pirate games whether or not there is DRM, and piracy is much easier on the PC than it is on consoles.
This fact alone is making major developers move away from publishing PC games (as evidenced by these crazy DRM schemes which alienate gamers).
Unless things like OnLive become a hit (and this will curb PC game piracy) I can't imaging major conglomerates publishing non-crippled games on the PC.
This will eventually leave indie developers alone on the PC, which really isn't all that bad since indie devs are responsible for much of the innovation in gaming.Ultimately, shipping games without DRM is suited for indie devs who want exposure in the community, but it makes little sense for major developers who already have the exposure and probably have little incentive to develop games outside of making some coin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369530</id>
	<title>Is this realy an anti-piracy device?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267794060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, they have smart people at Ubisoft.<br>They must know it is futile to use this kind of DRM to prevent piracy.</p><p>So what other purpose might this DRM have?</p><p>Well, it might be a ploy to get valuable user statistics, mapping out their demographics.<br>That way, they don't have to spend $$ on research and have the privilige of studying their subjects in their natural environments.<br>They would also get more precies statistics because of the larger dataset (basicly everyone who payed and played).<br>They would pretty much guarantee this dataset by implementing DRM like they did.</p><p>Since the dataset is updated constantly they would have immediate information on what their product is doing in the the market and would for instance be able to adjust their marketing strategy on the fly, making it cheaper and more effective.</p><p>So i think this is just a way to recover piracy losses, but not necessarily by battling piracy...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , they have smart people at Ubisoft.They must know it is futile to use this kind of DRM to prevent piracy.So what other purpose might this DRM have ? Well , it might be a ploy to get valuable user statistics , mapping out their demographics.That way , they do n't have to spend $ $ on research and have the privilige of studying their subjects in their natural environments.They would also get more precies statistics because of the larger dataset ( basicly everyone who payed and played ) .They would pretty much guarantee this dataset by implementing DRM like they did.Since the dataset is updated constantly they would have immediate information on what their product is doing in the the market and would for instance be able to adjust their marketing strategy on the fly , making it cheaper and more effective.So i think this is just a way to recover piracy losses , but not necessarily by battling piracy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, they have smart people at Ubisoft.They must know it is futile to use this kind of DRM to prevent piracy.So what other purpose might this DRM have?Well, it might be a ploy to get valuable user statistics, mapping out their demographics.That way, they don't have to spend $$ on research and have the privilige of studying their subjects in their natural environments.They would also get more precies statistics because of the larger dataset (basicly everyone who payed and played).They would pretty much guarantee this dataset by implementing DRM like they did.Since the dataset is updated constantly they would have immediate information on what their product is doing in the the market and would for instance be able to adjust their marketing strategy on the fly, making it cheaper and more effective.So i think this is just a way to recover piracy losses, but not necessarily by battling piracy...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31377864</id>
	<title>Again Pirate version more user friendly.</title>
	<author>upuv</author>
	<datestamp>1267801140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously.</p><p>As long as DRM makes the legit use of product more annoying than the illegitimate version this is a never ending battle.</p><p>The statement. "This DRM is unbreakable." Is always false. Who ever says it should be fired on the spot.  For either being an idiot or misleading the shareholders..</p><p>When DRM puts additional requirements on the user it will always result in lost sales.  People are fundamentally lazy.  When it's easier to use the cracked/hacked/broken/mangeled/slightly buggy version you will loose money.</p><p>The legit version MUST have more actual value than the pirate version in order to generate real cash flow.  For example: There are no real pirate versions of World of Warcraft because only proper versions are the ones that can give access to the real content.  Yes it's a different kind of game.  But it does illustrates the point very well.   The legit versions of the Ubi games do not add value to the customer.  As a matter of fact they do the opposite.  Thus making the pirate versions more attractive than the real.</p><p>Where is the value add compensation?  Something that would restore the balance.  The legit version adds annoyance of always on net.  But it adds the value of ?????.</p><p>Online game saves are not a value add.  They are again an annoyance.  Once those servers go down you don't have access to your save files. And they will go down on occasion.  That now becomes and announce rather than a value add.</p><p>Being online enhances the game play how? I mean real enhancement.  Not sales talk enhancement that a 12 year old kid doesn't care about.</p><p>For the N-th time. DRM only succeeds when it either adds value to the user or enables access to value add that exceeds the value loss of the DRM. ( I mean real value add. )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously.As long as DRM makes the legit use of product more annoying than the illegitimate version this is a never ending battle.The statement .
" This DRM is unbreakable .
" Is always false .
Who ever says it should be fired on the spot .
For either being an idiot or misleading the shareholders..When DRM puts additional requirements on the user it will always result in lost sales .
People are fundamentally lazy .
When it 's easier to use the cracked/hacked/broken/mangeled/slightly buggy version you will loose money.The legit version MUST have more actual value than the pirate version in order to generate real cash flow .
For example : There are no real pirate versions of World of Warcraft because only proper versions are the ones that can give access to the real content .
Yes it 's a different kind of game .
But it does illustrates the point very well .
The legit versions of the Ubi games do not add value to the customer .
As a matter of fact they do the opposite .
Thus making the pirate versions more attractive than the real.Where is the value add compensation ?
Something that would restore the balance .
The legit version adds annoyance of always on net .
But it adds the value of ? ? ? ?
? .Online game saves are not a value add .
They are again an annoyance .
Once those servers go down you do n't have access to your save files .
And they will go down on occasion .
That now becomes and announce rather than a value add.Being online enhances the game play how ?
I mean real enhancement .
Not sales talk enhancement that a 12 year old kid does n't care about.For the N-th time .
DRM only succeeds when it either adds value to the user or enables access to value add that exceeds the value loss of the DRM .
( I mean real value add .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.As long as DRM makes the legit use of product more annoying than the illegitimate version this is a never ending battle.The statement.
"This DRM is unbreakable.
" Is always false.
Who ever says it should be fired on the spot.
For either being an idiot or misleading the shareholders..When DRM puts additional requirements on the user it will always result in lost sales.
People are fundamentally lazy.
When it's easier to use the cracked/hacked/broken/mangeled/slightly buggy version you will loose money.The legit version MUST have more actual value than the pirate version in order to generate real cash flow.
For example: There are no real pirate versions of World of Warcraft because only proper versions are the ones that can give access to the real content.
Yes it's a different kind of game.
But it does illustrates the point very well.
The legit versions of the Ubi games do not add value to the customer.
As a matter of fact they do the opposite.
Thus making the pirate versions more attractive than the real.Where is the value add compensation?
Something that would restore the balance.
The legit version adds annoyance of always on net.
But it adds the value of ????
?.Online game saves are not a value add.
They are again an annoyance.
Once those servers go down you don't have access to your save files.
And they will go down on occasion.
That now becomes and announce rather than a value add.Being online enhances the game play how?
I mean real enhancement.
Not sales talk enhancement that a 12 year old kid doesn't care about.For the N-th time.
DRM only succeeds when it either adds value to the user or enables access to value add that exceeds the value loss of the DRM.
( I mean real value add.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Aranykai</author>
	<datestamp>1267721520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How the hell can you "pirate" something you are licensed to use? This is why it is a bone-head move to use the term piracy when you obviously mean unlicensed distribution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell can you " pirate " something you are licensed to use ?
This is why it is a bone-head move to use the term piracy when you obviously mean unlicensed distribution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell can you "pirate" something you are licensed to use?
This is why it is a bone-head move to use the term piracy when you obviously mean unlicensed distribution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370182</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1267800300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware. This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Ah, so what you're saying is that software vendors who ship games with DRM are morally equivalent to child pornographers?
<br>
<br>
Let's think of the children, and ban DRM now!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose that , by shipping games with DRM , software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware .
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam , botnets , and all the other nasties that infest our Internet .
Ah , so what you 're saying is that software vendors who ship games with DRM are morally equivalent to child pornographers ?
Let 's think of the children , and ban DRM now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.
Ah, so what you're saying is that software vendors who ship games with DRM are morally equivalent to child pornographers?
Let's think of the children, and ban DRM now!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368722</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267783680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually you can blame DRM creators for malware, because many DRM systems are arguably malware themselves. Some of them introduce security holes which could (in theory) be exploited by other nefarious sofware.</p><p>You're right in that you can't blame them for <i>third-party</i> malware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually you can blame DRM creators for malware , because many DRM systems are arguably malware themselves .
Some of them introduce security holes which could ( in theory ) be exploited by other nefarious sofware.You 're right in that you ca n't blame them for third-party malware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually you can blame DRM creators for malware, because many DRM systems are arguably malware themselves.
Some of them introduce security holes which could (in theory) be exploited by other nefarious sofware.You're right in that you can't blame them for third-party malware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372282</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1267810680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.</i></p><p>What exactly would be the consequences?  Anyone who wants to pirate can pirate, easily. In fact, it's easier to pirate than to play an uncracked game.  So logically, the consequences of removing DRM would be no change in the number of people who pirate, and an increase in legit users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.What exactly would be the consequences ?
Anyone who wants to pirate can pirate , easily .
In fact , it 's easier to pirate than to play an uncracked game .
So logically , the consequences of removing DRM would be no change in the number of people who pirate , and an increase in legit users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.What exactly would be the consequences?
Anyone who wants to pirate can pirate, easily.
In fact, it's easier to pirate than to play an uncracked game.
So logically, the consequences of removing DRM would be no change in the number of people who pirate, and an increase in legit users.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368540</id>
	<title>as always...</title>
	<author>smash</author>
	<datestamp>1267781460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... pay for DRM infected stuff - get shafted.
<p>
download the warez, have a product with <b>superior functionality</b>.
</p><p>
The days of code-wheels, manual page references, etc were bearable.  If you bought the game, it wasn't a major hassle.
</p><p>
Relying on internet connectivity, particularly shit that seems to stream data at something like 128kbit (from memory) is just bullshit.  Some countries have ISPs that charge for data.  Fucked if i'm going to pay for data to play a game I already fucking bought, that isn't an MMORPG!
</p><p>
If publishers put more effort into putting out a decent game, rather than spending millions on the next generation of DRM that will just inevitably be cracked anyway, we'd all be better off.
</p><p>
Back in the day, you'd get incentives to buy the game, like posters, t-shirts, a decent manual or whatever.  Now?  A nice big "Fuck you".
</p><p>
Well "Fuck you" ubisoft, I'd download the game to play it just out of spite, but my guess is that as with most of the current crop of games coming out, its barely worth the cost in bandwidth...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... pay for DRM infected stuff - get shafted .
download the warez , have a product with superior functionality .
The days of code-wheels , manual page references , etc were bearable .
If you bought the game , it was n't a major hassle .
Relying on internet connectivity , particularly shit that seems to stream data at something like 128kbit ( from memory ) is just bullshit .
Some countries have ISPs that charge for data .
Fucked if i 'm going to pay for data to play a game I already fucking bought , that is n't an MMORPG !
If publishers put more effort into putting out a decent game , rather than spending millions on the next generation of DRM that will just inevitably be cracked anyway , we 'd all be better off .
Back in the day , you 'd get incentives to buy the game , like posters , t-shirts , a decent manual or whatever .
Now ? A nice big " Fuck you " .
Well " Fuck you " ubisoft , I 'd download the game to play it just out of spite , but my guess is that as with most of the current crop of games coming out , its barely worth the cost in bandwidth.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... pay for DRM infected stuff - get shafted.
download the warez, have a product with superior functionality.
The days of code-wheels, manual page references, etc were bearable.
If you bought the game, it wasn't a major hassle.
Relying on internet connectivity, particularly shit that seems to stream data at something like 128kbit (from memory) is just bullshit.
Some countries have ISPs that charge for data.
Fucked if i'm going to pay for data to play a game I already fucking bought, that isn't an MMORPG!
If publishers put more effort into putting out a decent game, rather than spending millions on the next generation of DRM that will just inevitably be cracked anyway, we'd all be better off.
Back in the day, you'd get incentives to buy the game, like posters, t-shirts, a decent manual or whatever.
Now?  A nice big "Fuck you".
Well "Fuck you" ubisoft, I'd download the game to play it just out of spite, but my guess is that as with most of the current crop of games coming out, its barely worth the cost in bandwidth...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31391942</id>
	<title>UBI managed to made a sucker from the honest buyer</title>
	<author>valduboisvert</author>
	<datestamp>1267989240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So why buy an annoying product when you can have a better one from a hacker? UBI really shot themselves in the foot with this one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So why buy an annoying product when you can have a better one from a hacker ?
UBI really shot themselves in the foot with this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why buy an annoying product when you can have a better one from a hacker?
UBI really shot themselves in the foot with this one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368894</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267786200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I walked into the local games store this week and told them to cancel my order I didn't need to give a reason but it was the DRM. Fuck Ubisoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I walked into the local games store this week and told them to cancel my order I did n't need to give a reason but it was the DRM .
Fuck Ubisoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I walked into the local games store this week and told them to cancel my order I didn't need to give a reason but it was the DRM.
Fuck Ubisoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367152</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>RML</author>
	<datestamp>1267723260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Customers... Oh, too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.</p></div><p>You are assuming that no one would buy a game unless forced to by DRM... which must mean that you yourself wouldn't buy a game unless forced to by DRM.</p><p>Speak for yourself, pirate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Customers... Oh , too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.You are assuming that no one would buy a game unless forced to by DRM... which must mean that you yourself would n't buy a game unless forced to by DRM.Speak for yourself , pirate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Customers... Oh, too bad there are no customers because everyone stole the game.You are assuming that no one would buy a game unless forced to by DRM... which must mean that you yourself wouldn't buy a game unless forced to by DRM.Speak for yourself, pirate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366994</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue is that DRM really doesn't help all that much to stop piracy.  In order to be effective, the DRM has to work against EVERY SINGLE PERSON.  As soon as one person cracks it, they throw up the torrent of the DRM-free version and that's where all the casual pirates get it from.  No expertise is needed on the general pirate parts, just one hacker.</p><p>With the game Spore, it was very obvious that the DRM had been cracked - the game was one of the most pirated ever, but it was also highly profitable.  The only thing was the paying users had to deal with a crappy DRM system, while the pirates didn't.  People still bought the game though despite getting a worse version AND having to pay for it.  Just think how many people would pay if it were an equal version!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue is that DRM really does n't help all that much to stop piracy .
In order to be effective , the DRM has to work against EVERY SINGLE PERSON .
As soon as one person cracks it , they throw up the torrent of the DRM-free version and that 's where all the casual pirates get it from .
No expertise is needed on the general pirate parts , just one hacker.With the game Spore , it was very obvious that the DRM had been cracked - the game was one of the most pirated ever , but it was also highly profitable .
The only thing was the paying users had to deal with a crappy DRM system , while the pirates did n't .
People still bought the game though despite getting a worse version AND having to pay for it .
Just think how many people would pay if it were an equal version !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue is that DRM really doesn't help all that much to stop piracy.
In order to be effective, the DRM has to work against EVERY SINGLE PERSON.
As soon as one person cracks it, they throw up the torrent of the DRM-free version and that's where all the casual pirates get it from.
No expertise is needed on the general pirate parts, just one hacker.With the game Spore, it was very obvious that the DRM had been cracked - the game was one of the most pirated ever, but it was also highly profitable.
The only thing was the paying users had to deal with a crappy DRM system, while the pirates didn't.
People still bought the game though despite getting a worse version AND having to pay for it.
Just think how many people would pay if it were an equal version!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368812</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft claims it lacks features.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267785000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would say that only being able to play the tutorial and not the campaign is a pretty big lack of feature. Which is all you can do with the Skidrow "crack".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say that only being able to play the tutorial and not the campaign is a pretty big lack of feature .
Which is all you can do with the Skidrow " crack " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say that only being able to play the tutorial and not the campaign is a pretty big lack of feature.
Which is all you can do with the Skidrow "crack".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369880</id>
	<title>only a matter of time</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1267797720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked, as is usually the case, leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates.</p></div><p>Well, I never assumed it would be <i>immediately</i> cracked...  But it was only a matter of time.  Eventually some bored or determined person out there is going to get around to cracking it.  It may take long enough for some impatient people to go out and buy the game instead of pirating it...  But it <b>is</b> going to be cracked.</p><p>And <b>when</b> that happens, you've got a choice of either paying cash for a game that won't work when your Internet goes down...  Paying cash and then breaking the law to crack that game you just bought...  Or pirating the game from the start so that you've got a game that works with no Internet for free.</p><p>And the publishers wonder why piracy is rampant.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked , as is usually the case , leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates.Well , I never assumed it would be immediately cracked... But it was only a matter of time .
Eventually some bored or determined person out there is going to get around to cracking it .
It may take long enough for some impatient people to go out and buy the game instead of pirating it... But it is going to be cracked.And when that happens , you 've got a choice of either paying cash for a game that wo n't work when your Internet goes down... Paying cash and then breaking the law to crack that game you just bought... Or pirating the game from the start so that you 've got a game that works with no Internet for free.And the publishers wonder why piracy is rampant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Others assumed that it would be immediately cracked, as is usually the case, leaving the inconvenience for paying customers and resulting in a superior product for pirates.Well, I never assumed it would be immediately cracked...  But it was only a matter of time.
Eventually some bored or determined person out there is going to get around to cracking it.
It may take long enough for some impatient people to go out and buy the game instead of pirating it...  But it is going to be cracked.And when that happens, you've got a choice of either paying cash for a game that won't work when your Internet goes down...  Paying cash and then breaking the law to crack that game you just bought...  Or pirating the game from the start so that you've got a game that works with no Internet for free.And the publishers wonder why piracy is rampant.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372440</id>
	<title>Re:The sad thing</title>
	<author>dc29A</author>
	<datestamp>1267811640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oblivion had SecuROM as DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oblivion had SecuROM as DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oblivion had SecuROM as DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370682</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>hardburn</author>
	<datestamp>1267803300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Mp3.com case did handle <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space\_shifting" title="wikipedia.org">this specific situation</a> [wikipedia.org]:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in In re Aimster, also discussed (hypothetically) the propriety of space shifting:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone might own a popular-music CD that he was particularly fond of, but he had not downloaded it into his computer and now he finds himself out of town but with this laptop and he wants to listen to the CD, so he uses Aimster&rsquo;s service to download a copy. This might be a fair use rather than a copyright infringement, by analogy to the time shifting approved as fair use in the Sony case. . . . <b>The analogy was rejected in UMG Recordings v. MP3.com, Inc. . . . on the ground that the copy on the defendant's server was an unauthorized derivative work</b>; a solider ground, in light of Sony&rsquo;s rejection of the parallel argument with respect to time shifting, would have been that the defendant&rsquo;s method for requiring that its customers "prove" that they owned the CDs containing the music they wanted to download was too lax.</p></div></div><p>(Emphisis mine)</p><p>It is <a href="http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/if-you-own-a-cd-or-cassette-tape-can-you-legally-d-15176.html" title="avvo.com">not legal</a> [avvo.com] to torrent a CD (or game, or whatever) you own. You have to make the copy yourself. Which is why things like the DeCSS case are so problematic--they took away the only legal way for you to exercise certain fair rights.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Mp3.com case did handle this specific situation [ wikipedia.org ] : The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals , in In re Aimster , also discussed ( hypothetically ) the propriety of space shifting : Someone might own a popular-music CD that he was particularly fond of , but he had not downloaded it into his computer and now he finds himself out of town but with this laptop and he wants to listen to the CD , so he uses Aimster    s service to download a copy .
This might be a fair use rather than a copyright infringement , by analogy to the time shifting approved as fair use in the Sony case .
. .
. The analogy was rejected in UMG Recordings v. MP3.com , Inc. . .
. on the ground that the copy on the defendant 's server was an unauthorized derivative work ; a solider ground , in light of Sony    s rejection of the parallel argument with respect to time shifting , would have been that the defendant    s method for requiring that its customers " prove " that they owned the CDs containing the music they wanted to download was too lax .
( Emphisis mine ) It is not legal [ avvo.com ] to torrent a CD ( or game , or whatever ) you own .
You have to make the copy yourself .
Which is why things like the DeCSS case are so problematic--they took away the only legal way for you to exercise certain fair rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Mp3.com case did handle this specific situation [wikipedia.org]:The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in In re Aimster, also discussed (hypothetically) the propriety of space shifting:Someone might own a popular-music CD that he was particularly fond of, but he had not downloaded it into his computer and now he finds himself out of town but with this laptop and he wants to listen to the CD, so he uses Aimster’s service to download a copy.
This might be a fair use rather than a copyright infringement, by analogy to the time shifting approved as fair use in the Sony case.
. .
. The analogy was rejected in UMG Recordings v. MP3.com, Inc. . .
. on the ground that the copy on the defendant's server was an unauthorized derivative work; a solider ground, in light of Sony’s rejection of the parallel argument with respect to time shifting, would have been that the defendant’s method for requiring that its customers "prove" that they owned the CDs containing the music they wanted to download was too lax.
(Emphisis mine)It is not legal [avvo.com] to torrent a CD (or game, or whatever) you own.
You have to make the copy yourself.
Which is why things like the DeCSS case are so problematic--they took away the only legal way for you to exercise certain fair rights.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367668</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Therilith</author>
	<datestamp>1267727640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>Without DRM:</b> <br>
Management: Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems!<br>
<br>
Pirates: Awesome! We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems!<br>
<br>
Customers: This game is awesome!<br>
<br>
<b>With DRM:</b> <br>
Management: Let's spend a lot of money on DRM instead of improving the game.<br>
<br>
Pirates: Awesome! We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems!<br>
<br>
Customers: WTF? Why won't this stupid game work?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without DRM : Management : Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems !
Pirates : Awesome !
We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems !
Customers : This game is awesome !
With DRM : Management : Let 's spend a lot of money on DRM instead of improving the game .
Pirates : Awesome !
We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems !
Customers : WTF ?
Why wo n't this stupid game work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without DRM: 
Management: Lets not put DRM in our software so that everyone can play the game without problems!
Pirates: Awesome!
We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems!
Customers: This game is awesome!
With DRM: 
Management: Let's spend a lot of money on DRM instead of improving the game.
Pirates: Awesome!
We can copy the game and play it for free with no problems!
Customers: WTF?
Why won't this stupid game work?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369052</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>metacell</author>
	<datestamp>1267787880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud "customers" on Slashdot claim it would.</p></div><p>I read the post by the Ubisoft employee, and he (or she) is really only saying the game was more pirated than previus Prince of Persia games, and that he's very disappointed that people don't want to pay for their games.</p><p>Isn't it possible that the game was downloaded a lot just because expectations were initiallly high?</p><p>I just have a hard time understanding how DRM can make much of a difference to pirates, since games are up on BitTorrent sites within days anyway. The only situation where I see DRM making a difference, is when a friend buys the game and you attempt to copy it directly from their original disk. But who does that these days? It's faster and easier to download it from a BitTorrent site.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud " customers " on Slashdot claim it would.I read the post by the Ubisoft employee , and he ( or she ) is really only saying the game was more pirated than previus Prince of Persia games , and that he 's very disappointed that people do n't want to pay for their games.Is n't it possible that the game was downloaded a lot just because expectations were initiallly high ? I just have a hard time understanding how DRM can make much of a difference to pirates , since games are up on BitTorrent sites within days anyway .
The only situation where I see DRM making a difference , is when a friend buys the game and you attempt to copy it directly from their original disk .
But who does that these days ?
It 's faster and easier to download it from a BitTorrent site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That move must not have turned out as well as all the loud "customers" on Slashdot claim it would.I read the post by the Ubisoft employee, and he (or she) is really only saying the game was more pirated than previus Prince of Persia games, and that he's very disappointed that people don't want to pay for their games.Isn't it possible that the game was downloaded a lot just because expectations were initiallly high?I just have a hard time understanding how DRM can make much of a difference to pirates, since games are up on BitTorrent sites within days anyway.
The only situation where I see DRM making a difference, is when a friend buys the game and you attempt to copy it directly from their original disk.
But who does that these days?
It's faster and easier to download it from a BitTorrent site.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368832</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267785300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3. Ubisoft anonymously releases a crack to the scene so that (a) they don't have to keep donating money and (b) they can accuse pirates of being cancer-patient killers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3 .
Ubisoft anonymously releases a crack to the scene so that ( a ) they do n't have to keep donating money and ( b ) they can accuse pirates of being cancer-patient killers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.
Ubisoft anonymously releases a crack to the scene so that (a) they don't have to keep donating money and (b) they can accuse pirates of being cancer-patient killers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367276</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>woopate</author>
	<datestamp>1267724160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know personally people in the following three groups:</p><p>1. People who buy games without DRM (They do exist, depending on your definition of DRM), but pirate games with it.</p><p>2. People who purchase games after pirating it in order to give appreciation to the developers of what they consider a fantastic game.</p><p>3. Pirates who would never give their money to the developer under any circumstances.</p><p>Groups 1 and 2 invalidate your hypothetical situation, and group 3 do not cause loss for the developer.</p><p>This whole stealing thing kinda gets a little hazy when the 'stealing' does not deprive the seller of a copy of his product to sell to someone else. Especially when the concept of selling stuff came from limited resources, when the resource in question is infinite in quantity. There is no "Mass Effect well" that will run dry, nor will we have a Peak Intellectual Property Crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know personally people in the following three groups : 1 .
People who buy games without DRM ( They do exist , depending on your definition of DRM ) , but pirate games with it.2 .
People who purchase games after pirating it in order to give appreciation to the developers of what they consider a fantastic game.3 .
Pirates who would never give their money to the developer under any circumstances.Groups 1 and 2 invalidate your hypothetical situation , and group 3 do not cause loss for the developer.This whole stealing thing kinda gets a little hazy when the 'stealing ' does not deprive the seller of a copy of his product to sell to someone else .
Especially when the concept of selling stuff came from limited resources , when the resource in question is infinite in quantity .
There is no " Mass Effect well " that will run dry , nor will we have a Peak Intellectual Property Crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know personally people in the following three groups:1.
People who buy games without DRM (They do exist, depending on your definition of DRM), but pirate games with it.2.
People who purchase games after pirating it in order to give appreciation to the developers of what they consider a fantastic game.3.
Pirates who would never give their money to the developer under any circumstances.Groups 1 and 2 invalidate your hypothetical situation, and group 3 do not cause loss for the developer.This whole stealing thing kinda gets a little hazy when the 'stealing' does not deprive the seller of a copy of his product to sell to someone else.
Especially when the concept of selling stuff came from limited resources, when the resource in question is infinite in quantity.
There is no "Mass Effect well" that will run dry, nor will we have a Peak Intellectual Property Crisis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368940</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267786680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?</p></div><p>Exactly the same number who would have gone with the torrent if this DRM system hadn't been used. So they haven't gained anything.

However, they will irritate customers who don't connect to the internet when playing games - for example, people who take their laptops on flights for entertainment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ? Exactly the same number who would have gone with the torrent if this DRM system had n't been used .
So they have n't gained anything .
However , they will irritate customers who do n't connect to the internet when playing games - for example , people who take their laptops on flights for entertainment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?Exactly the same number who would have gone with the torrent if this DRM system hadn't been used.
So they haven't gained anything.
However, they will irritate customers who don't connect to the internet when playing games - for example, people who take their laptops on flights for entertainment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490</id>
	<title>Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$10 says UbiSoft doesn't learn from this.  Again.</p><p>At least I can use this in combination with a legitimate copy, to get the best of both worlds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 10 says UbiSoft does n't learn from this .
Again.At least I can use this in combination with a legitimate copy , to get the best of both worlds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$10 says UbiSoft doesn't learn from this.
Again.At least I can use this in combination with a legitimate copy, to get the best of both worlds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369066</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>TheReaperD</author>
	<datestamp>1267788300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reality is they will <b>blame</b> the pirates regardless of whether they are responsible or not.  It is much easier to blame a 3rd party with no voice to defend itself than to admit failure of management policies.  It is also likely that the managers will keep their jobs longer if they do so.  So, they will blame the pirates, reality be damned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reality is they will blame the pirates regardless of whether they are responsible or not .
It is much easier to blame a 3rd party with no voice to defend itself than to admit failure of management policies .
It is also likely that the managers will keep their jobs longer if they do so .
So , they will blame the pirates , reality be damned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reality is they will blame the pirates regardless of whether they are responsible or not.
It is much easier to blame a 3rd party with no voice to defend itself than to admit failure of management policies.
It is also likely that the managers will keep their jobs longer if they do so.
So, they will blame the pirates, reality be damned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1267721160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While you have a point, consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable. As a compromise, I suggest buying it, pirating it, and writing an angry letter explaining the situation. It'll be ignored of course, but it would make me feel better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While you have a point , consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable .
As a compromise , I suggest buying it , pirating it , and writing an angry letter explaining the situation .
It 'll be ignored of course , but it would make me feel better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you have a point, consider that if you pay for it you make them think their DRM is acceptable.
As a compromise, I suggest buying it, pirating it, and writing an angry letter explaining the situation.
It'll be ignored of course, but it would make me feel better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369076</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267788480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A 'simple (read cheap) traditional' DRM would be cracked before the game was even released. As a result, the charity would have to give $5000 to Ubisoft for every day the game was cracked before its release.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A 'simple ( read cheap ) traditional ' DRM would be cracked before the game was even released .
As a result , the charity would have to give $ 5000 to Ubisoft for every day the game was cracked before its release .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 'simple (read cheap) traditional' DRM would be cracked before the game was even released.
As a result, the charity would have to give $5000 to Ubisoft for every day the game was cracked before its release.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371332</id>
	<title>Paradox does use some DRM</title>
	<author>listentoreason</author>
	<datestamp>1267806360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... at least <a href="http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=410205#3" title="paradoxplaza.com" rel="nofollow">according to their CEO</a> [paradoxplaza.com]. In general, it does look like "most" of their games are DRM-free, but I was unable to find a clear statement about when and what. The example above is Majesty 2: The Fantasy Kingdom, the DRM in question is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impulse\_(content\_delivery)#Resale\_limitations" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Stardock's GOO</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>I am currently only buying DRM-free games. I patronize <a href="http://www.gog.com/en/search/sort/order/date" title="gog.com" rel="nofollow">GOG</a> [gog.com] extensively, they <a href="http://www.gog.com/en/about\_us/#3" title="gog.com" rel="nofollow">explicitly state they never use DRM</a> [gog.com]. The games are older, but they have many good ones, the prices are excellent, and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... <b>NO</b> DRM. I'm very interested in Paradox, but want to be able to know - clearly and explicitly - which games lack DRM</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... at least according to their CEO [ paradoxplaza.com ] .
In general , it does look like " most " of their games are DRM-free , but I was unable to find a clear statement about when and what .
The example above is Majesty 2 : The Fantasy Kingdom , the DRM in question is Stardock 's GOO [ wikipedia.org ] .I am currently only buying DRM-free games .
I patronize GOG [ gog.com ] extensively , they explicitly state they never use DRM [ gog.com ] .
The games are older , but they have many good ones , the prices are excellent , and ... NO DRM .
I 'm very interested in Paradox , but want to be able to know - clearly and explicitly - which games lack DRM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... at least according to their CEO [paradoxplaza.com].
In general, it does look like "most" of their games are DRM-free, but I was unable to find a clear statement about when and what.
The example above is Majesty 2: The Fantasy Kingdom, the DRM in question is Stardock's GOO [wikipedia.org].I am currently only buying DRM-free games.
I patronize GOG [gog.com] extensively, they explicitly state they never use DRM [gog.com].
The games are older, but they have many good ones, the prices are excellent, and ... NO DRM.
I'm very interested in Paradox, but want to be able to know - clearly and explicitly - which games lack DRM</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371440</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1267806840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want that to work, include photocopies of recipts for games you <i>did</i> buy.  Because otherwise everyone will assume you're the <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/2/19/" title="penny-arcade.com">the guy on the right</a> [penny-arcade.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want that to work , include photocopies of recipts for games you did buy .
Because otherwise everyone will assume you 're the the guy on the right [ penny-arcade.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want that to work, include photocopies of recipts for games you did buy.
Because otherwise everyone will assume you're the the guy on the right [penny-arcade.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367308</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Supurcell</author>
	<datestamp>1267724340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we've reached a point where pirates are not just a fringe group of people who just don't want to pay for games, but are actually the competition. They are releasing a similar product to yours(in fact, it <i>is</i> your product) only it's better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we 've reached a point where pirates are not just a fringe group of people who just do n't want to pay for games , but are actually the competition .
They are releasing a similar product to yours ( in fact , it is your product ) only it 's better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we've reached a point where pirates are not just a fringe group of people who just don't want to pay for games, but are actually the competition.
They are releasing a similar product to yours(in fact, it is your product) only it's better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367836</id>
	<title>Another idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267729320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make a DRM implementation which allows pirated copies to play but with an unskippable lecture of the evils of piracy which grows in length with each execution.   People won't bother cracking it because it's a minor inconvenience and you'll probably guilt some people into buying your game when they would of otherwise cracked it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make a DRM implementation which allows pirated copies to play but with an unskippable lecture of the evils of piracy which grows in length with each execution .
People wo n't bother cracking it because it 's a minor inconvenience and you 'll probably guilt some people into buying your game when they would of otherwise cracked it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make a DRM implementation which allows pirated copies to play but with an unskippable lecture of the evils of piracy which grows in length with each execution.
People won't bother cracking it because it's a minor inconvenience and you'll probably guilt some people into buying your game when they would of otherwise cracked it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371478</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ummm... you obviously think that they are logical.</p><p>Here's what really happens. We don't buy it, we don't pirate it. They say "PIRACY IS UP!" (because it always is, there will be "100 trillion downloads!" and all sales lost is due to "damn pirates", and they'll keep banging out the DRM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm... you obviously think that they are logical.Here 's what really happens .
We do n't buy it , we do n't pirate it .
They say " PIRACY IS UP !
" ( because it always is , there will be " 100 trillion downloads !
" and all sales lost is due to " damn pirates " , and they 'll keep banging out the DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm... you obviously think that they are logical.Here's what really happens.
We don't buy it, we don't pirate it.
They say "PIRACY IS UP!
" (because it always is, there will be "100 trillion downloads!
" and all sales lost is due to "damn pirates", and they'll keep banging out the DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371408</id>
	<title>lulzy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh man did I just lul. Great job haxors.</p><p>Seriously when will the industry just cut their losses and come to terms that some people will pirate. Get over it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh man did I just lul .
Great job haxors.Seriously when will the industry just cut their losses and come to terms that some people will pirate .
Get over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh man did I just lul.
Great job haxors.Seriously when will the industry just cut their losses and come to terms that some people will pirate.
Get over it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369604</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267795020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are people who would find that as an incentive to crack the DRM even faster.  Welcome to the internet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are people who would find that as an incentive to crack the DRM even faster .
Welcome to the internet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are people who would find that as an incentive to crack the DRM even faster.
Welcome to the internet!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367364</id>
	<title>Re:The sad thing</title>
	<author>Tromad</author>
	<datestamp>1267724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing is I actually buy games. I really want to buy Dawn of Discovery, and most likely the new Settlers game. But I'm sure as hell not going to put up with the DRM. It pains me to say this but maybe the way to go is like Dragon Age; no DRM for the basic game, but if you want extra content you have to link it to an account. Oblivion didn't have ANY DRM (not even a CD key) and surely it made tons of money. I'm getting so tired of this shit maybe it is time to switch to a console, although I tend to like RTS/Tycoon/Empire building games which are typically poor on the console.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is I actually buy games .
I really want to buy Dawn of Discovery , and most likely the new Settlers game .
But I 'm sure as hell not going to put up with the DRM .
It pains me to say this but maybe the way to go is like Dragon Age ; no DRM for the basic game , but if you want extra content you have to link it to an account .
Oblivion did n't have ANY DRM ( not even a CD key ) and surely it made tons of money .
I 'm getting so tired of this shit maybe it is time to switch to a console , although I tend to like RTS/Tycoon/Empire building games which are typically poor on the console .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is I actually buy games.
I really want to buy Dawn of Discovery, and most likely the new Settlers game.
But I'm sure as hell not going to put up with the DRM.
It pains me to say this but maybe the way to go is like Dragon Age; no DRM for the basic game, but if you want extra content you have to link it to an account.
Oblivion didn't have ANY DRM (not even a CD key) and surely it made tons of money.
I'm getting so tired of this shit maybe it is time to switch to a console, although I tend to like RTS/Tycoon/Empire building games which are typically poor on the console.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366922</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>rxan</author>
	<datestamp>1267721700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.</p></div><p>So the pirates who supply cracks containing malware, or on sites that have malware, are not the ones to blame? I propose that, you are an idiot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose that , by shipping games with DRM , software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.So the pirates who supply cracks containing malware , or on sites that have malware , are not the ones to blame ?
I propose that , you are an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.So the pirates who supply cracks containing malware, or on sites that have malware, are not the ones to blame?
I propose that, you are an idiot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368988</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267787220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your argument only works if you believe that pirates are not pirates by choice (or the choice is somehow coerced). Otherwise, it's entirely the pirates' fault.</p><p>In fact, if anything, I would say it was the pirates responsible for coercing the media companies into trying increasingly restrictive DRM. So, it would be the pirates' fault anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your argument only works if you believe that pirates are not pirates by choice ( or the choice is somehow coerced ) .
Otherwise , it 's entirely the pirates ' fault.In fact , if anything , I would say it was the pirates responsible for coercing the media companies into trying increasingly restrictive DRM .
So , it would be the pirates ' fault anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your argument only works if you believe that pirates are not pirates by choice (or the choice is somehow coerced).
Otherwise, it's entirely the pirates' fault.In fact, if anything, I would say it was the pirates responsible for coercing the media companies into trying increasingly restrictive DRM.
So, it would be the pirates' fault anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373138</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>atfrase</author>
	<datestamp>1267815000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.  If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.  A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.</p></div><p>The problem with this is that these content industries (games, movies, music, etc) have the nasty habit of <b>defining</b> piracy figures in terms of sales figures.  So if they see falling sales figures, they will claim that as proof of a corresponding increase in piracy.  I suspect this DRM lunacy will not end until at least one major company follows this kind of logic all the way to bankruptcy; sales keep going down, DRM keeps getting worse, customers keep getting more annoyed, sales go down even more, until the company is just out of business.</p><p>The real tragedy is that even then, in their dying breath, that company will claim that they went under due to piracy, not due to producing a worse and worse product (as the DRM gets more and more invasive).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go .
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that are n't matched by rising piracy figures , then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate , and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase .
A pirate does n't interest them , but a lost customer does.The problem with this is that these content industries ( games , movies , music , etc ) have the nasty habit of defining piracy figures in terms of sales figures .
So if they see falling sales figures , they will claim that as proof of a corresponding increase in piracy .
I suspect this DRM lunacy will not end until at least one major company follows this kind of logic all the way to bankruptcy ; sales keep going down , DRM keeps getting worse , customers keep getting more annoyed , sales go down even more , until the company is just out of business.The real tragedy is that even then , in their dying breath , that company will claim that they went under due to piracy , not due to producing a worse and worse product ( as the DRM gets more and more invasive ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a case where voting with your wallet is the way to go.
If they see dropping sales figures as compared to the first game that aren't matched by rising piracy figures, then that tells them that some people out there have ethical reasons not to pirate, and are opposed enough to intrusive DRM crap not to purchase.
A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.The problem with this is that these content industries (games, movies, music, etc) have the nasty habit of defining piracy figures in terms of sales figures.
So if they see falling sales figures, they will claim that as proof of a corresponding increase in piracy.
I suspect this DRM lunacy will not end until at least one major company follows this kind of logic all the way to bankruptcy; sales keep going down, DRM keeps getting worse, customers keep getting more annoyed, sales go down even more, until the company is just out of business.The real tragedy is that even then, in their dying breath, that company will claim that they went under due to piracy, not due to producing a worse and worse product (as the DRM gets more and more invasive).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31404054</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1268080440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem here is, it does not affect the ones that it should affect. To bring the mandatory car analogy into play, it's like putting in an elaborate lock in your car that requires you to push the key in, press five buttons at the same time as you turn the key and sing a certain secret melody to start it, while the general starting mechanism stays the same and can be hotwired just as easily as it ever has been.</p><p>And if that doesn't stop the car thieves, we have to add more buttons to press, but we'll leave the easily hotwired starting mechanism the same.</p><p>The problem is not whether or not pirates are a reason to put in DRM. The problem is that these people are not affected by it. It has never, in not a single case, stopped copying. Usually not even for a while, as it is claimed to "at least enable sales for that important first two weeks". The only ones affected by it are those that are the ones that you need not affect: Your paying customers.</p><p>So, at best, you don't achive anything in respect to copying. At worst, you piss off your customers if, as in this case, your DRM cripples the game and renders it unusable, but again only for your customers. You don't hurt the ones that copied the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem here is , it does not affect the ones that it should affect .
To bring the mandatory car analogy into play , it 's like putting in an elaborate lock in your car that requires you to push the key in , press five buttons at the same time as you turn the key and sing a certain secret melody to start it , while the general starting mechanism stays the same and can be hotwired just as easily as it ever has been.And if that does n't stop the car thieves , we have to add more buttons to press , but we 'll leave the easily hotwired starting mechanism the same.The problem is not whether or not pirates are a reason to put in DRM .
The problem is that these people are not affected by it .
It has never , in not a single case , stopped copying .
Usually not even for a while , as it is claimed to " at least enable sales for that important first two weeks " .
The only ones affected by it are those that are the ones that you need not affect : Your paying customers.So , at best , you do n't achive anything in respect to copying .
At worst , you piss off your customers if , as in this case , your DRM cripples the game and renders it unusable , but again only for your customers .
You do n't hurt the ones that copied the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem here is, it does not affect the ones that it should affect.
To bring the mandatory car analogy into play, it's like putting in an elaborate lock in your car that requires you to push the key in, press five buttons at the same time as you turn the key and sing a certain secret melody to start it, while the general starting mechanism stays the same and can be hotwired just as easily as it ever has been.And if that doesn't stop the car thieves, we have to add more buttons to press, but we'll leave the easily hotwired starting mechanism the same.The problem is not whether or not pirates are a reason to put in DRM.
The problem is that these people are not affected by it.
It has never, in not a single case, stopped copying.
Usually not even for a while, as it is claimed to "at least enable sales for that important first two weeks".
The only ones affected by it are those that are the ones that you need not affect: Your paying customers.So, at best, you don't achive anything in respect to copying.
At worst, you piss off your customers if, as in this case, your DRM cripples the game and renders it unusable, but again only for your customers.
You don't hurt the ones that copied the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373806</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>H0NGK0NGPH00EY</author>
	<datestamp>1267818000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Check out games by <a href="http://www.stardock.com/" title="stardock.com">Stardock</a> [stardock.com] (Sins of a Solar Empire) and <a href="http://www.kalypsomedia.com/en-us/" title="kalypsomedia.com">Kalypso Media</a> [kalypsomedia.com] (Tropico 3).  Those are two PC game companies that have publicly stated positions against heavy-handed, paying-customer-punishing DRM.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out games by Stardock [ stardock.com ] ( Sins of a Solar Empire ) and Kalypso Media [ kalypsomedia.com ] ( Tropico 3 ) .
Those are two PC game companies that have publicly stated positions against heavy-handed , paying-customer-punishing DRM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out games by Stardock [stardock.com] (Sins of a Solar Empire) and Kalypso Media [kalypsomedia.com] (Tropico 3).
Those are two PC game companies that have publicly stated positions against heavy-handed, paying-customer-punishing DRM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371126</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267805280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does."</p><p>Pirates are a subset of lost customers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A pirate does n't interest them , but a lost customer does .
" Pirates are a subset of lost customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A pirate doesn't interest them, but a lost customer does.
"Pirates are a subset of lost customers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367672</id>
	<title>I normally don't post throwaway comments but</title>
	<author>mykos</author>
	<datestamp>1267727640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell.  Yes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell .
Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell.
Yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368546</id>
	<title>Devs should take a look at</title>
	<author>KalgarThrax</author>
	<datestamp>1267781460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What these guys are doing: <a href="http://www.wolfire.com/overgrowth" title="wolfire.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wolfire.com/overgrowth</a> [wolfire.com].<br> Sure they are living in their parent's basement, but they seem genuinely talented, both artistically and technologically. Other game developers that are trying to cater to billions have already given up and have nothing to complain about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What these guys are doing : http : //www.wolfire.com/overgrowth [ wolfire.com ] .
Sure they are living in their parent 's basement , but they seem genuinely talented , both artistically and technologically .
Other game developers that are trying to cater to billions have already given up and have nothing to complain about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What these guys are doing: http://www.wolfire.com/overgrowth [wolfire.com].
Sure they are living in their parent's basement, but they seem genuinely talented, both artistically and technologically.
Other game developers that are trying to cater to billions have already given up and have nothing to complain about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367158</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1267723320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, like when Stardock released their first couple games without any DRM?  They seemed to grow pretty quickly for somebody without customers.</p><p>Although now that they're big, they've adopted some "no-need to crack" honor system DRM just to satisfy the suits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , like when Stardock released their first couple games without any DRM ?
They seemed to grow pretty quickly for somebody without customers.Although now that they 're big , they 've adopted some " no-need to crack " honor system DRM just to satisfy the suits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, like when Stardock released their first couple games without any DRM?
They seemed to grow pretty quickly for somebody without customers.Although now that they're big, they've adopted some "no-need to crack" honor system DRM just to satisfy the suits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..... No.</p><p>See, you may have had a point, except that Stardock proved that you're line of thought is wrong. They released Galactic Civilizations 2 without any DRM. It was a success for them, with many buying it simply because it had no DRM and they wanted to support the company.</p><p>DRM is shit and will always be shit. Piracy should be viewed as a cost of doing business, not as an excuse to wage war against the people you're trying to sell to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh ..... No.See , you may have had a point , except that Stardock proved that you 're line of thought is wrong .
They released Galactic Civilizations 2 without any DRM .
It was a success for them , with many buying it simply because it had no DRM and they wanted to support the company.DRM is shit and will always be shit .
Piracy should be viewed as a cost of doing business , not as an excuse to wage war against the people you 're trying to sell to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh ..... No.See, you may have had a point, except that Stardock proved that you're line of thought is wrong.
They released Galactic Civilizations 2 without any DRM.
It was a success for them, with many buying it simply because it had no DRM and they wanted to support the company.DRM is shit and will always be shit.
Piracy should be viewed as a cost of doing business, not as an excuse to wage war against the people you're trying to sell to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366636</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I propose that by limiting access to your router you are promoting the downloading of wifi crackers, and therefore are also contributing to spam, botnets, etc.</p><p>I demand you be imprisoned at once.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I propose that by limiting access to your router you are promoting the downloading of wifi crackers , and therefore are also contributing to spam , botnets , etc.I demand you be imprisoned at once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I propose that by limiting access to your router you are promoting the downloading of wifi crackers, and therefore are also contributing to spam, botnets, etc.I demand you be imprisoned at once.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374430</id>
	<title>I have no interest in the game, but i'm glad!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267820760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally hope these guys go bankrupt. I purchased an older game from them, and it ended up installing hidden device drivers. A class-action lawsuit was apparently brought against them for this, and Ubi then stopped using the "protection" system in question... but they fucked those of us over who had already purchased the game by not delivering a patch to remove it for us. So, here's hoping you go out of business Ubisoft. I was an honest customer who got shafted, and now I hope you go the way of 3D Realms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally hope these guys go bankrupt .
I purchased an older game from them , and it ended up installing hidden device drivers .
A class-action lawsuit was apparently brought against them for this , and Ubi then stopped using the " protection " system in question... but they fucked those of us over who had already purchased the game by not delivering a patch to remove it for us .
So , here 's hoping you go out of business Ubisoft .
I was an honest customer who got shafted , and now I hope you go the way of 3D Realms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally hope these guys go bankrupt.
I purchased an older game from them, and it ended up installing hidden device drivers.
A class-action lawsuit was apparently brought against them for this, and Ubi then stopped using the "protection" system in question... but they fucked those of us over who had already purchased the game by not delivering a patch to remove it for us.
So, here's hoping you go out of business Ubisoft.
I was an honest customer who got shafted, and now I hope you go the way of 3D Realms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368770</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft claims it lacks features.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267784280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just looked around on some forums and it looks like you can only play the first mission with a pirated game and you'd have to download the other levels from ubisoft's servers. Maybe it's just a bug, but who knows.</p><p>And the whole thing is not really cracked. Silent Hunter had the option to store the safegame offline and that's what the crackers used. As far as I know Ass Creed won't come with that option, so you probably wont be able to save your game if you pirate it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just looked around on some forums and it looks like you can only play the first mission with a pirated game and you 'd have to download the other levels from ubisoft 's servers .
Maybe it 's just a bug , but who knows.And the whole thing is not really cracked .
Silent Hunter had the option to store the safegame offline and that 's what the crackers used .
As far as I know Ass Creed wo n't come with that option , so you probably wont be able to save your game if you pirate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just looked around on some forums and it looks like you can only play the first mission with a pirated game and you'd have to download the other levels from ubisoft's servers.
Maybe it's just a bug, but who knows.And the whole thing is not really cracked.
Silent Hunter had the option to store the safegame offline and that's what the crackers used.
As far as I know Ass Creed won't come with that option, so you probably wont be able to save your game if you pirate it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592</id>
	<title>You must know what this will cause right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PC games= little profit, rampant pirating of any desirable product<br>Console games= RECORD BREAKING PROFITS little/insignificant pirating</p><p>Which platform would you choose to release your average-development-cost-of-28-million-dollars game?</p><p>Average slashdot user: "YAY! PIRATES! LOLOLOLOL........duhhhh...Why are all the good games being released onto consoles lately?"</p><p>Can't be related could it, guys? How dare they protect their property! Ubisoft doesn't have to make you games. They don't have to do anything. You don't "deserve" their product free of DRM, or just plain free, for that matter. Keep this pattern up, and you will make the message clear: make a PC game, and you will make very little money. Hate to point it out, but all the games you love are only made and are continued to be made, for profit only. Take away the profit and you don't get your games...on PC at least...</p><p>Good job, Skid-Row! You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it. Congrats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PC games = little profit , rampant pirating of any desirable productConsole games = RECORD BREAKING PROFITS little/insignificant piratingWhich platform would you choose to release your average-development-cost-of-28-million-dollars game ? Average slashdot user : " YAY !
PIRATES ! LOLOLOLOL........duhhhh...Why are all the good games being released onto consoles lately ?
" Ca n't be related could it , guys ?
How dare they protect their property !
Ubisoft does n't have to make you games .
They do n't have to do anything .
You do n't " deserve " their product free of DRM , or just plain free , for that matter .
Keep this pattern up , and you will make the message clear : make a PC game , and you will make very little money .
Hate to point it out , but all the games you love are only made and are continued to be made , for profit only .
Take away the profit and you do n't get your games...on PC at least...Good job , Skid-Row !
You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it .
Congrats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PC games= little profit, rampant pirating of any desirable productConsole games= RECORD BREAKING PROFITS little/insignificant piratingWhich platform would you choose to release your average-development-cost-of-28-million-dollars game?Average slashdot user: "YAY!
PIRATES! LOLOLOLOL........duhhhh...Why are all the good games being released onto consoles lately?
"Can't be related could it, guys?
How dare they protect their property!
Ubisoft doesn't have to make you games.
They don't have to do anything.
You don't "deserve" their product free of DRM, or just plain free, for that matter.
Keep this pattern up, and you will make the message clear: make a PC game, and you will make very little money.
Hate to point it out, but all the games you love are only made and are continued to be made, for profit only.
Take away the profit and you don't get your games...on PC at least...Good job, Skid-Row!
You have hastened the end of PC gaming as you know it.
Congrats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368632</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>popo</author>
	<datestamp>1267782540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; "So sure of it, in fact, that they're continually willing to invest a lot of time, money, and effort into their futile pursuit."</p><p>Yes, that is amazing.  But what's *more* amazing is that the companies who invest all that time and money also invest so heavily in PUBLICIZING their DRM awesomeness.   Such publicity is not only a massive invitation and challenge to the hacker community -- but it elevates the status of the hacker who ultimately cracks the code.  All that time and money not only bites the publisher in the rear end, but ultimately becomes a massive publicity campaign for the very enemy the publisher hoped to foil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; " So sure of it , in fact , that they 're continually willing to invest a lot of time , money , and effort into their futile pursuit .
" Yes , that is amazing .
But what 's * more * amazing is that the companies who invest all that time and money also invest so heavily in PUBLICIZING their DRM awesomeness .
Such publicity is not only a massive invitation and challenge to the hacker community -- but it elevates the status of the hacker who ultimately cracks the code .
All that time and money not only bites the publisher in the rear end , but ultimately becomes a massive publicity campaign for the very enemy the publisher hoped to foil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; "So sure of it, in fact, that they're continually willing to invest a lot of time, money, and effort into their futile pursuit.
"Yes, that is amazing.
But what's *more* amazing is that the companies who invest all that time and money also invest so heavily in PUBLICIZING their DRM awesomeness.
Such publicity is not only a massive invitation and challenge to the hacker community -- but it elevates the status of the hacker who ultimately cracks the code.
All that time and money not only bites the publisher in the rear end, but ultimately becomes a massive publicity campaign for the very enemy the publisher hoped to foil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Alioth</author>
	<datestamp>1267784700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In which case, why come up with these hugely elaborate schemes? If a simple check for the game media in the drive will defeat normal users, why bother wasting the time to make DRM more sophisticated than this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In which case , why come up with these hugely elaborate schemes ?
If a simple check for the game media in the drive will defeat normal users , why bother wasting the time to make DRM more sophisticated than this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In which case, why come up with these hugely elaborate schemes?
If a simple check for the game media in the drive will defeat normal users, why bother wasting the time to make DRM more sophisticated than this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</id>
	<title>Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given that:
<ul>
<li>No DRM is perfect, and is therefore guaranteed to be cracked.  </li><li>Hosting cracks is semi-legal at best.</li><li>Semi-legal sites tend to be supported by crappy advertising (at best) or malware installation (at worst)</li></ul><p>

I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.  This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that : No DRM is perfect , and is therefore guaranteed to be cracked .
Hosting cracks is semi-legal at best.Semi-legal sites tend to be supported by crappy advertising ( at best ) or malware installation ( at worst ) I propose that , by shipping games with DRM , software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware .
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam , botnets , and all the other nasties that infest our Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that:

No DRM is perfect, and is therefore guaranteed to be cracked.
Hosting cracks is semi-legal at best.Semi-legal sites tend to be supported by crappy advertising (at best) or malware installation (at worst)

I propose that, by shipping games with DRM, software vendors are promoting the dissemination of malware.
This means that DRM is a direct contributor to spam, botnets, and all the other nasties that infest our Internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367392</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267724940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, no.  Somebody would crack it ASAP, just to be a jerk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , no .
Somebody would crack it ASAP , just to be a jerk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, no.
Somebody would crack it ASAP, just to be a jerk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496</id>
	<title>The sad thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The really sad thing about this DRM being cracked is as much a win to the consumer as to the pirate. The pirate gets a game that functions under more circumstances than the consumer, which I imagine will lead to more consumers being pissed off at Ubisoft and resulting to pirate a game they've already paid for just so they can fucking play it without having a connection to the internet 24/7. <br> <br>Good job Ubisoft, alienating customers will surely lower piracy rates and raise your stock prices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The really sad thing about this DRM being cracked is as much a win to the consumer as to the pirate .
The pirate gets a game that functions under more circumstances than the consumer , which I imagine will lead to more consumers being pissed off at Ubisoft and resulting to pirate a game they 've already paid for just so they can fucking play it without having a connection to the internet 24/7 .
Good job Ubisoft , alienating customers will surely lower piracy rates and raise your stock prices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really sad thing about this DRM being cracked is as much a win to the consumer as to the pirate.
The pirate gets a game that functions under more circumstances than the consumer, which I imagine will lead to more consumers being pissed off at Ubisoft and resulting to pirate a game they've already paid for just so they can fucking play it without having a connection to the internet 24/7.
Good job Ubisoft, alienating customers will surely lower piracy rates and raise your stock prices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367268</id>
	<title>lol@ubisoft</title>
	<author>nataflux</author>
	<datestamp>1267724100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hack the planet!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hack the planet ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hack the planet!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367346</id>
	<title>Re:The sad thing</title>
	<author>DeadboltX</author>
	<datestamp>1267724580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This DRM crack benefits legitimate consumers as well, since you can apply it to a legitimate copy of the game. Pirates have INCREASED the value of the software by allowing it to work offline.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This DRM crack benefits legitimate consumers as well , since you can apply it to a legitimate copy of the game .
Pirates have INCREASED the value of the software by allowing it to work offline .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This DRM crack benefits legitimate consumers as well, since you can apply it to a legitimate copy of the game.
Pirates have INCREASED the value of the software by allowing it to work offline.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368578</id>
	<title>hallo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267781820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>good article timothy and useful information</p><p>MaxSoft<br>http://soft.kurdd.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>good article timothy and useful informationMaxSofthttp : //soft.kurdd.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>good article timothy and useful informationMaxSofthttp://soft.kurdd.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375186</id>
	<title>DRM that frustrates legitimate users is futile</title>
	<author>FoolishOwl</author>
	<datestamp>1267781460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A fundamental problem with DRM is that it's a constant irritant for legitimate users. So, many legitimate users will install the legitimately purchased game, then download the "cracked" version, to bypass the annoyance of DRM. Also, since the DRM is developed independently of the game itself, a frequent source of bugs is conflict between the DRM and the game, so installing a "cracked" version can be a way to overcome bugs. So, a lot of legitimate users will purchase and install the game, then download and install the "cracked" version, and will feel ethically justified in doing so.</p><p>Consequently, any game with DRM that frustrates legitimate users will create demand by legitimate users for "cracked" versions<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... which will be used by illegitimate users as well. DRM of this sort is self-defeating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A fundamental problem with DRM is that it 's a constant irritant for legitimate users .
So , many legitimate users will install the legitimately purchased game , then download the " cracked " version , to bypass the annoyance of DRM .
Also , since the DRM is developed independently of the game itself , a frequent source of bugs is conflict between the DRM and the game , so installing a " cracked " version can be a way to overcome bugs .
So , a lot of legitimate users will purchase and install the game , then download and install the " cracked " version , and will feel ethically justified in doing so.Consequently , any game with DRM that frustrates legitimate users will create demand by legitimate users for " cracked " versions ... which will be used by illegitimate users as well .
DRM of this sort is self-defeating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A fundamental problem with DRM is that it's a constant irritant for legitimate users.
So, many legitimate users will install the legitimately purchased game, then download the "cracked" version, to bypass the annoyance of DRM.
Also, since the DRM is developed independently of the game itself, a frequent source of bugs is conflict between the DRM and the game, so installing a "cracked" version can be a way to overcome bugs.
So, a lot of legitimate users will purchase and install the game, then download and install the "cracked" version, and will feel ethically justified in doing so.Consequently, any game with DRM that frustrates legitimate users will create demand by legitimate users for "cracked" versions ... which will be used by illegitimate users as well.
DRM of this sort is self-defeating.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367332</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Pentium100</author>
	<datestamp>1267724460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Management: Let's put this DRM to guarantee that the game isn't pirated.<br>Developers: Great! Let's do it!<br>Crackers: Let's crack the DRM.<br>Pirates: Let's wait for the crack.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...a day later...<br>Crackers: Done!<br>Pirates: Great!<br>Customer: This stupid game doesn't work on my computer. Maybe my friend can help me make it work...<br>Friend: Oh that's because of the DRM, just go to site x and download the cracked copy.<br>Customer: Thanks! Oh, there are more games there and they all are available for free, nice!</p><p>The bottom line is that pirates still get the game for free whether it has DRM or not. The only difference is that putting the DRM in costs the company some money.</p><p>Your argument would be valid if <i>the DRM worked</i>. It doesn't, so, for the pirates, it's the same, just the paying customers are inconvenienced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Management : Let 's put this DRM to guarantee that the game is n't pirated.Developers : Great !
Let 's do it ! Crackers : Let 's crack the DRM.Pirates : Let 's wait for the crack .
...a day later...Crackers : Done ! Pirates : Great ! Customer : This stupid game does n't work on my computer .
Maybe my friend can help me make it work...Friend : Oh that 's because of the DRM , just go to site x and download the cracked copy.Customer : Thanks !
Oh , there are more games there and they all are available for free , nice ! The bottom line is that pirates still get the game for free whether it has DRM or not .
The only difference is that putting the DRM in costs the company some money.Your argument would be valid if the DRM worked .
It does n't , so , for the pirates , it 's the same , just the paying customers are inconvenienced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Management: Let's put this DRM to guarantee that the game isn't pirated.Developers: Great!
Let's do it!Crackers: Let's crack the DRM.Pirates: Let's wait for the crack.
...a day later...Crackers: Done!Pirates: Great!Customer: This stupid game doesn't work on my computer.
Maybe my friend can help me make it work...Friend: Oh that's because of the DRM, just go to site x and download the cracked copy.Customer: Thanks!
Oh, there are more games there and they all are available for free, nice!The bottom line is that pirates still get the game for free whether it has DRM or not.
The only difference is that putting the DRM in costs the company some money.Your argument would be valid if the DRM worked.
It doesn't, so, for the pirates, it's the same, just the paying customers are inconvenienced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374924</id>
	<title>Re:Off topic, but fundamental to the discussion...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267780140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pretty big "ifs" there. I would say yes, provided it also didn't stop me from reselling the product when I was done with it, and didn't stop me from distributing copies when its copyright ran out.</p><p>If I could flap my arms and fly to the moon, would I do it? No, I'd asphyxiate as soon as I left the atmosphere. Pretty much the same thing though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pretty big " ifs " there .
I would say yes , provided it also did n't stop me from reselling the product when I was done with it , and did n't stop me from distributing copies when its copyright ran out.If I could flap my arms and fly to the moon , would I do it ?
No , I 'd asphyxiate as soon as I left the atmosphere .
Pretty much the same thing though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pretty big "ifs" there.
I would say yes, provided it also didn't stop me from reselling the product when I was done with it, and didn't stop me from distributing copies when its copyright ran out.If I could flap my arms and fly to the moon, would I do it?
No, I'd asphyxiate as soon as I left the atmosphere.
Pretty much the same thing though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>lena\_10326</author>
	<datestamp>1267731420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>To be honest, I don't think you get it. How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack? Then scan it for trojans? (Believe me most copies will have one.) And then install it from the cryptic readme text file? I'm talking non-geeks. People who send their PCs to the geek squad. People who've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit. You know, the <em>other</em> 99.7\% of the user base. Well, I'll tell you: <em>very few</em>. They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers. You are thinking from the perspective of a consumer--not of an executive on the board. If DRM causes the company to lose 10\% of their base but pickup a new 11\%, they don't care.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest , I do n't think you get it .
How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ?
Then scan it for trojans ?
( Believe me most copies will have one .
) And then install it from the cryptic readme text file ?
I 'm talking non-geeks .
People who send their PCs to the geek squad .
People who 've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit .
You know , the other 99.7 \ % of the user base .
Well , I 'll tell you : very few .
They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers .
You are thinking from the perspective of a consumer--not of an executive on the board .
If DRM causes the company to lose 10 \ % of their base but pickup a new 11 \ % , they do n't care .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest, I don't think you get it.
How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?
Then scan it for trojans?
(Believe me most copies will have one.
) And then install it from the cryptic readme text file?
I'm talking non-geeks.
People who send their PCs to the geek squad.
People who've got no idea how a byte is different from a bit.
You know, the other 99.7\% of the user base.
Well, I'll tell you: very few.
They use DRM because DRM works on the majority of consumers.
You are thinking from the perspective of a consumer--not of an executive on the board.
If DRM causes the company to lose 10\% of their base but pickup a new 11\%, they don't care.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</id>
	<title>any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267721760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>you'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they 'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you'd think some companies might enjoy the sort of publicity and awareness they'd get out of having a lot of people use their software... and without fear on top of it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31399804</id>
	<title>The cracked game IS NOT working</title>
	<author>Silver Surfer 1</author>
	<datestamp>1268058660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like many are claiming it is.</p><p>the crack will let you get into the game, but will prevent you from progressing past the tutorial mission. It is funny seeing some people bitch that they cannot start a campaign as suggestions to fix this are to buy the game.</p><p>Silent Hunter 3 had starforce and there is a stickied thread over on the UBI forums on how to install the game using a crack.</p><p>Silent Hunter 4 had securerom on it and on the final patch removed copy protection from the game.</p><p>I see no reason to doubt that when the time is right copy protection will be removed from Silent Hunter 5 as well.</p><p>With the new graphics and much better modding tools that allow scripting SH5 a year from now will be the best Subsim to date.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like many are claiming it is.the crack will let you get into the game , but will prevent you from progressing past the tutorial mission .
It is funny seeing some people bitch that they can not start a campaign as suggestions to fix this are to buy the game.Silent Hunter 3 had starforce and there is a stickied thread over on the UBI forums on how to install the game using a crack.Silent Hunter 4 had securerom on it and on the final patch removed copy protection from the game.I see no reason to doubt that when the time is right copy protection will be removed from Silent Hunter 5 as well.With the new graphics and much better modding tools that allow scripting SH5 a year from now will be the best Subsim to date .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like many are claiming it is.the crack will let you get into the game, but will prevent you from progressing past the tutorial mission.
It is funny seeing some people bitch that they cannot start a campaign as suggestions to fix this are to buy the game.Silent Hunter 3 had starforce and there is a stickied thread over on the UBI forums on how to install the game using a crack.Silent Hunter 4 had securerom on it and on the final patch removed copy protection from the game.I see no reason to doubt that when the time is right copy protection will be removed from Silent Hunter 5 as well.With the new graphics and much better modding tools that allow scripting SH5 a year from now will be the best Subsim to date.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367208</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft hates Troops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267723800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please do not try to use business terms correctly on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>Customers (the person that purchases the item) do not frankly give a rats ass if there is DRM.  Mom and Dad don't care when buying the game for their kids, because they rarely even look.  Their homes are already connected to the Internet and the annoyance is never felt unless the fledgling gamer (consumer) decides to join the family for dinner and attempts to be social by explaining something that the other people just nod at to be polite.</p><p>Please leave your fake MBA card on the table before exiting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please do not try to use business terms correctly on /.Customers ( the person that purchases the item ) do not frankly give a rats ass if there is DRM .
Mom and Dad do n't care when buying the game for their kids , because they rarely even look .
Their homes are already connected to the Internet and the annoyance is never felt unless the fledgling gamer ( consumer ) decides to join the family for dinner and attempts to be social by explaining something that the other people just nod at to be polite.Please leave your fake MBA card on the table before exiting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please do not try to use business terms correctly on /.Customers (the person that purchases the item) do not frankly give a rats ass if there is DRM.
Mom and Dad don't care when buying the game for their kids, because they rarely even look.
Their homes are already connected to the Internet and the annoyance is never felt unless the fledgling gamer (consumer) decides to join the family for dinner and attempts to be social by explaining something that the other people just nod at to be polite.Please leave your fake MBA card on the table before exiting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372292</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>brkello</author>
	<datestamp>1267810740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  Though I think it should just have a cd key and that should be enough.  Save money on not developing complicated DRM and still stop the non-techs from pirating.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Though I think it should just have a cd key and that should be enough .
Save money on not developing complicated DRM and still stop the non-techs from pirating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Though I think it should just have a cd key and that should be enough.
Save money on not developing complicated DRM and still stop the non-techs from pirating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the worst of both worlds.

</p><p>If you pirate it, you are open for prosecution.  It doesn't matter if you also have a licensed copy, you still committed copyright violation.  If you're OK with that risk, and the BSA don't seem too trigger happy against consumers right now, then go ahead and pirate it, but be aware that risk always exists.

</p><p>If you buy it, you are supporting UbiSoft.  You are supporting their game development team, which may be good, but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology.  They will only be reporting on sales to their managers, and if they can spin a story that their decisions, including the DRM, resulted in higher sales, they'll get a pat on the back and a "jolly good, carry on."  If you want to do all of that, go ahead and buy it, but be aware that you can't support just the game devs and not the boneheads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the worst of both worlds .
If you pirate it , you are open for prosecution .
It does n't matter if you also have a licensed copy , you still committed copyright violation .
If you 're OK with that risk , and the BSA do n't seem too trigger happy against consumers right now , then go ahead and pirate it , but be aware that risk always exists .
If you buy it , you are supporting UbiSoft .
You are supporting their game development team , which may be good , but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology .
They will only be reporting on sales to their managers , and if they can spin a story that their decisions , including the DRM , resulted in higher sales , they 'll get a pat on the back and a " jolly good , carry on .
" If you want to do all of that , go ahead and buy it , but be aware that you ca n't support just the game devs and not the boneheads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the worst of both worlds.
If you pirate it, you are open for prosecution.
It doesn't matter if you also have a licensed copy, you still committed copyright violation.
If you're OK with that risk, and the BSA don't seem too trigger happy against consumers right now, then go ahead and pirate it, but be aware that risk always exists.
If you buy it, you are supporting UbiSoft.
You are supporting their game development team, which may be good, but also the boneheads who selected this DRM technology.
They will only be reporting on sales to their managers, and if they can spin a story that their decisions, including the DRM, resulted in higher sales, they'll get a pat on the back and a "jolly good, carry on.
"  If you want to do all of that, go ahead and buy it, but be aware that you can't support just the game devs and not the boneheads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370270</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267800900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything from Good Old Games is DRM free...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything from Good Old Games is DRM free.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything from Good Old Games is DRM free...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368508</id>
	<title>You missed the point : used games != piracy</title>
	<author>AwaxSlashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1267781040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You all missed the point : this new DRM target was to lock every game to a single account. With such an association, you can not resell your game anymore. As such, they don't even care if the DRM is cracked in 10 years or 10 millisec : you can not legally resell a game that was legally purchased.</p><p>In France, 40\% of purchased games are used games. I guess that the figure should be more or less the same in other western countries.</p><p>So, let's say 100 people are buying the game and 200 are stealing it. Only 60 of them are giving money to the editor, the 40 others are giving money to the reseller shop (fees) and lowering the acquisition cost of a portion of the 60 ones. The 200 pirates do not pay anything and the editors have given up on them.</p><p>Now, with this "no more used game" DRM, honest people might not all buy the game : a few because they dont like DRM but most of them won't buy the game because they won't be able to lower their acquisition price buy reselling it. For the editor, as long as there are still 61 people paying the full price for the game, they win. You now have +39 pirates but you have +1 giving money to the editor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You all missed the point : this new DRM target was to lock every game to a single account .
With such an association , you can not resell your game anymore .
As such , they do n't even care if the DRM is cracked in 10 years or 10 millisec : you can not legally resell a game that was legally purchased.In France , 40 \ % of purchased games are used games .
I guess that the figure should be more or less the same in other western countries.So , let 's say 100 people are buying the game and 200 are stealing it .
Only 60 of them are giving money to the editor , the 40 others are giving money to the reseller shop ( fees ) and lowering the acquisition cost of a portion of the 60 ones .
The 200 pirates do not pay anything and the editors have given up on them.Now , with this " no more used game " DRM , honest people might not all buy the game : a few because they dont like DRM but most of them wo n't buy the game because they wo n't be able to lower their acquisition price buy reselling it .
For the editor , as long as there are still 61 people paying the full price for the game , they win .
You now have + 39 pirates but you have + 1 giving money to the editor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You all missed the point : this new DRM target was to lock every game to a single account.
With such an association, you can not resell your game anymore.
As such, they don't even care if the DRM is cracked in 10 years or 10 millisec : you can not legally resell a game that was legally purchased.In France, 40\% of purchased games are used games.
I guess that the figure should be more or less the same in other western countries.So, let's say 100 people are buying the game and 200 are stealing it.
Only 60 of them are giving money to the editor, the 40 others are giving money to the reseller shop (fees) and lowering the acquisition cost of a portion of the 60 ones.
The 200 pirates do not pay anything and the editors have given up on them.Now, with this "no more used game" DRM, honest people might not all buy the game : a few because they dont like DRM but most of them won't buy the game because they won't be able to lower their acquisition price buy reselling it.
For the editor, as long as there are still 61 people paying the full price for the game, they win.
You now have +39 pirates but you have +1 giving money to the editor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368890</id>
	<title>Re:any games shipping sans drm these days?</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1267786140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well for Ubisoft using the Goatse image as Startup screen for the game probably would have cost them less sales.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well for Ubisoft using the Goatse image as Startup screen for the game probably would have cost them less sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well for Ubisoft using the Goatse image as Startup screen for the game probably would have cost them less sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367092</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about not playing it at all? Don't buy it, don't pirate it. That'll kill them financially, and kill their mindshare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about not playing it at all ?
Do n't buy it , do n't pirate it .
That 'll kill them financially , and kill their mindshare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about not playing it at all?
Don't buy it, don't pirate it.
That'll kill them financially, and kill their mindshare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369384</id>
	<title>Hollywood scenario</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267792380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My theory:<br>The fight against piracy is a big-picture Quest for the Holy Grail type affair going all the way up.<br>The government sponsors publishers to include DRM in their games, which then get cracked eventually. The crackers are tracked down, perhaps publicly persecuted to keep appearances up. Then behind the curtain they receive an offer they can't refuse and become security experts for the government. To develop a "better" DRM, which makes more skilled crackers crawl out from under the woodwork.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My theory : The fight against piracy is a big-picture Quest for the Holy Grail type affair going all the way up.The government sponsors publishers to include DRM in their games , which then get cracked eventually .
The crackers are tracked down , perhaps publicly persecuted to keep appearances up .
Then behind the curtain they receive an offer they ca n't refuse and become security experts for the government .
To develop a " better " DRM , which makes more skilled crackers crawl out from under the woodwork .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My theory:The fight against piracy is a big-picture Quest for the Holy Grail type affair going all the way up.The government sponsors publishers to include DRM in their games, which then get cracked eventually.
The crackers are tracked down, perhaps publicly persecuted to keep appearances up.
Then behind the curtain they receive an offer they can't refuse and become security experts for the government.
To develop a "better" DRM, which makes more skilled crackers crawl out from under the woodwork.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367198</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1267723740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.</p></div><p>The consequences?  The consequences are we go back to the 1980's-90's software culture, and I'd actually pay money for a computer game again.  Sure, there might be annoying wheel-spinners or license keys, but the companies might be able to afford cloth maps again, or wishbringer stones, or paper manuals with associated fluff.  As things stand now, I play my old games, and only buy occasional used ones for my Wii and Xbox.  The kids who copy computer games from their friends when they have $0 grow up to be adults who buy games when they have $$$$, unless those games don't work.  I stopped buying PC games right after Mechwarrior4, because the DRM on that piece of crap wouldn't work in any of the 3 CDROM  drives I owned, and MS's tech support said: "go buy another drive; hope it works"  I gave it to a friend.  Back then I still believed it was anti-piracy copy protection.  Now I know it was the beginning of the PC software industry's war on end-users (not customers; their customers are the middle-men like COMPUSA who get stuck with gamebox overstock and sell it at a loss until they go out of business).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.The consequences ?
The consequences are we go back to the 1980 's-90 's software culture , and I 'd actually pay money for a computer game again .
Sure , there might be annoying wheel-spinners or license keys , but the companies might be able to afford cloth maps again , or wishbringer stones , or paper manuals with associated fluff .
As things stand now , I play my old games , and only buy occasional used ones for my Wii and Xbox .
The kids who copy computer games from their friends when they have $ 0 grow up to be adults who buy games when they have $ $ $ $ , unless those games do n't work .
I stopped buying PC games right after Mechwarrior4 , because the DRM on that piece of crap would n't work in any of the 3 CDROM drives I owned , and MS 's tech support said : " go buy another drive ; hope it works " I gave it to a friend .
Back then I still believed it was anti-piracy copy protection .
Now I know it was the beginning of the PC software industry 's war on end-users ( not customers ; their customers are the middle-men like COMPUSA who get stuck with gamebox overstock and sell it at a loss until they go out of business ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.The consequences?
The consequences are we go back to the 1980's-90's software culture, and I'd actually pay money for a computer game again.
Sure, there might be annoying wheel-spinners or license keys, but the companies might be able to afford cloth maps again, or wishbringer stones, or paper manuals with associated fluff.
As things stand now, I play my old games, and only buy occasional used ones for my Wii and Xbox.
The kids who copy computer games from their friends when they have $0 grow up to be adults who buy games when they have $$$$, unless those games don't work.
I stopped buying PC games right after Mechwarrior4, because the DRM on that piece of crap wouldn't work in any of the 3 CDROM  drives I owned, and MS's tech support said: "go buy another drive; hope it works"  I gave it to a friend.
Back then I still believed it was anti-piracy copy protection.
Now I know it was the beginning of the PC software industry's war on end-users (not customers; their customers are the middle-men like COMPUSA who get stuck with gamebox overstock and sell it at a loss until they go out of business).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370530</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267802220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The game would get cracked even faster and Ubisoft wouldn't donate any money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The game would get cracked even faster and Ubisoft would n't donate any money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The game would get cracked even faster and Ubisoft wouldn't donate any money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368560</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1267781640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But don't you think for them a simple "insert original CD to start" protection wouldn't have been enough? Hell, a "protection" that reads the gaps that only faithful 1:1 copy tools could reproduce (you know, those "hacking tools" like Alcohol) would have sufficed, no need for an invasive driver.</p><p>Incidentally, that would also have been a protection I could have accepted, and I would have bought the game, along with those 99.7\% you mention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But do n't you think for them a simple " insert original CD to start " protection would n't have been enough ?
Hell , a " protection " that reads the gaps that only faithful 1 : 1 copy tools could reproduce ( you know , those " hacking tools " like Alcohol ) would have sufficed , no need for an invasive driver.Incidentally , that would also have been a protection I could have accepted , and I would have bought the game , along with those 99.7 \ % you mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But don't you think for them a simple "insert original CD to start" protection wouldn't have been enough?
Hell, a "protection" that reads the gaps that only faithful 1:1 copy tools could reproduce (you know, those "hacking tools" like Alcohol) would have sufficed, no need for an invasive driver.Incidentally, that would also have been a protection I could have accepted, and I would have bought the game, along with those 99.7\% you mention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102</id>
	<title>Remote Server Execution could work as DRM</title>
	<author>Raystonn</author>
	<datestamp>1267722840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If some significant portion of the game was actually computed on the remote server, then "cracking" it would not be possible.  One could attempt to "hack" a user account on the remote server to get the free play, or a shady developer could attempt to reverse engineer the networking protocol and implement a fake remote server others could run.  The latter would only prove useful if the portion of the game run by the server was trivial.  Otherwise, the developer would essentially be reimplementing vast portions of the game him/herself and should just make their own game anyhow.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If some significant portion of the game was actually computed on the remote server , then " cracking " it would not be possible .
One could attempt to " hack " a user account on the remote server to get the free play , or a shady developer could attempt to reverse engineer the networking protocol and implement a fake remote server others could run .
The latter would only prove useful if the portion of the game run by the server was trivial .
Otherwise , the developer would essentially be reimplementing vast portions of the game him/herself and should just make their own game anyhow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If some significant portion of the game was actually computed on the remote server, then "cracking" it would not be possible.
One could attempt to "hack" a user account on the remote server to get the free play, or a shady developer could attempt to reverse engineer the networking protocol and implement a fake remote server others could run.
The latter would only prove useful if the portion of the game run by the server was trivial.
Otherwise, the developer would essentially be reimplementing vast portions of the game him/herself and should just make their own game anyhow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367442</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>bdwlangm</author>
	<datestamp>1267725420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that's in great spirit, but unfortunately, it only takes one dick.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that 's in great spirit , but unfortunately , it only takes one dick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that's in great spirit, but unfortunately, it only takes one dick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366618</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1267719600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the problem is people that give them money because they just can't resist shiny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the problem is people that give them money because they just ca n't resist shiny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the problem is people that give them money because they just can't resist shiny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367678</id>
	<title>I would have bought 100 copies of the game</title>
	<author>judeancodersfront</author>
	<datestamp>1267727760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>to give to everyone at work.

Now I'm forced to pirate the game and it makes me want to cry since I've always bought my games and I really wanted to pay for 100 copies. My little girl is sick with the plague and told me the other day that seeing me cry just makes her feel worse.


P.S.
You can trust my story because I'm an internet forum poster.</htmltext>
<tokenext>to give to everyone at work .
Now I 'm forced to pirate the game and it makes me want to cry since I 've always bought my games and I really wanted to pay for 100 copies .
My little girl is sick with the plague and told me the other day that seeing me cry just makes her feel worse .
P.S . You can trust my story because I 'm an internet forum poster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to give to everyone at work.
Now I'm forced to pirate the game and it makes me want to cry since I've always bought my games and I really wanted to pay for 100 copies.
My little girl is sick with the plague and told me the other day that seeing me cry just makes her feel worse.
P.S.
You can trust my story because I'm an internet forum poster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367664</id>
	<title>I told you so</title>
	<author>slayer\_ix</author>
	<datestamp>1267727520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is why I buy games, don't open them but instead download them because of the stupid DRM that plagues legitimate copies.

No I don't wish to always have the disc in the drive.

No I don't need an internet connection for single player games.

No I don't want to install copy protection software.

Make a good game and I will buy it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I buy games , do n't open them but instead download them because of the stupid DRM that plagues legitimate copies .
No I do n't wish to always have the disc in the drive .
No I do n't need an internet connection for single player games .
No I do n't want to install copy protection software .
Make a good game and I will buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I buy games, don't open them but instead download them because of the stupid DRM that plagues legitimate copies.
No I don't wish to always have the disc in the drive.
No I don't need an internet connection for single player games.
No I don't want to install copy protection software.
Make a good game and I will buy it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367588</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, because when savvy people pirate games they do so under the pretense that the cost of the game is prohibitive. Tying a sale to some cause won't increase the value of the game (how many gamers truly feel cancer research affects them on a daily basis), and these people will argue that they can just donate to causes on their own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , because when savvy people pirate games they do so under the pretense that the cost of the game is prohibitive .
Tying a sale to some cause wo n't increase the value of the game ( how many gamers truly feel cancer research affects them on a daily basis ) , and these people will argue that they can just donate to causes on their own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, because when savvy people pirate games they do so under the pretense that the cost of the game is prohibitive.
Tying a sale to some cause won't increase the value of the game (how many gamers truly feel cancer research affects them on a daily basis), and these people will argue that they can just donate to causes on their own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375306</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267782060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.</i></p><p>Funny, the original DOOM did quite well not only without DRM, but giving it away for free! Cory Doctorow partly credits his posting his novels on the web for his being on the NYT best seller list. DRM is a relatively new (albeit retro - more later) thing. Not having DRM never killed any games or game companies before, are there that many pirates? Is the younger generation that much more dishonest than mine (and the one after mine) was?</p><p>Back when I was heavily into the gaming scene there was a site called Planet Crap for game discussion (it could still be there for all I know), and Warren Marshall, then head of Epic (probably still is) was there a lot. Ironically (or maybe hypocritically), Marshall thought the same way you do, that anybody who could pirate games would because everyone's dishonest. He based this on the fact that he, himself was a pirate in college! But the fact is, most people AREN'T dishonest and WILL pay for their stuff.</p><p>Back when games came on floppy they instituted DRM schemes that like now, invariably failed. The gamers themselves massively boycotted any game that had DRM, and it went away -- until a new generation of suckers willing to put up with the fact that paying for a game got you less than pirating it was born.</p><p>DRM not only cannot work, it is completely unnecessary. Unless, of course, the publisher has ulterior motives, such as killing resale, or in the case of the RIAA, killing the competetion.</p><p>Disclaimer -- I do have a dog in this fight. My daughter manages a GameStop store, and GameStop sells used games. DRM isn't about piracy, it's about keeping my daughter from selling used games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.Funny , the original DOOM did quite well not only without DRM , but giving it away for free !
Cory Doctorow partly credits his posting his novels on the web for his being on the NYT best seller list .
DRM is a relatively new ( albeit retro - more later ) thing .
Not having DRM never killed any games or game companies before , are there that many pirates ?
Is the younger generation that much more dishonest than mine ( and the one after mine ) was ? Back when I was heavily into the gaming scene there was a site called Planet Crap for game discussion ( it could still be there for all I know ) , and Warren Marshall , then head of Epic ( probably still is ) was there a lot .
Ironically ( or maybe hypocritically ) , Marshall thought the same way you do , that anybody who could pirate games would because everyone 's dishonest .
He based this on the fact that he , himself was a pirate in college !
But the fact is , most people ARE N'T dishonest and WILL pay for their stuff.Back when games came on floppy they instituted DRM schemes that like now , invariably failed .
The gamers themselves massively boycotted any game that had DRM , and it went away -- until a new generation of suckers willing to put up with the fact that paying for a game got you less than pirating it was born.DRM not only can not work , it is completely unnecessary .
Unless , of course , the publisher has ulterior motives , such as killing resale , or in the case of the RIAA , killing the competetion.Disclaimer -- I do have a dog in this fight .
My daughter manages a GameStop store , and GameStop sells used games .
DRM is n't about piracy , it 's about keeping my daughter from selling used games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.Funny, the original DOOM did quite well not only without DRM, but giving it away for free!
Cory Doctorow partly credits his posting his novels on the web for his being on the NYT best seller list.
DRM is a relatively new (albeit retro - more later) thing.
Not having DRM never killed any games or game companies before, are there that many pirates?
Is the younger generation that much more dishonest than mine (and the one after mine) was?Back when I was heavily into the gaming scene there was a site called Planet Crap for game discussion (it could still be there for all I know), and Warren Marshall, then head of Epic (probably still is) was there a lot.
Ironically (or maybe hypocritically), Marshall thought the same way you do, that anybody who could pirate games would because everyone's dishonest.
He based this on the fact that he, himself was a pirate in college!
But the fact is, most people AREN'T dishonest and WILL pay for their stuff.Back when games came on floppy they instituted DRM schemes that like now, invariably failed.
The gamers themselves massively boycotted any game that had DRM, and it went away -- until a new generation of suckers willing to put up with the fact that paying for a game got you less than pirating it was born.DRM not only cannot work, it is completely unnecessary.
Unless, of course, the publisher has ulterior motives, such as killing resale, or in the case of the RIAA, killing the competetion.Disclaimer -- I do have a dog in this fight.
My daughter manages a GameStop store, and GameStop sells used games.
DRM isn't about piracy, it's about keeping my daughter from selling used games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371712</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267808100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.</i></p><p>Hmmm...</p><p>Developers: Let's use the most anti-customer draconian abusive DRM technology currently allows, no matter how much it hurts our loyal paying customers.</p><p>Person with a brain: Your DRM was cracked in less than 24 hours and all of your paying customers who were not scared off by your DRM are still boned.</p><p>Developers: Yeah, but that was much better than using no DRM, right?</p><p>It's broken anyway. Use a disc check and/or serial number (no crazy copy protection). Customer far less likely to be harmed, game works forever. No change for pirates, except in the case of crackers who don't get all the "glory" for taking down horrible DRM.</p><p>(Funny, the Captcha was "DREADED". How appropriate for commentary on DRM.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.Hmmm...Developers : Let 's use the most anti-customer draconian abusive DRM technology currently allows , no matter how much it hurts our loyal paying customers.Person with a brain : Your DRM was cracked in less than 24 hours and all of your paying customers who were not scared off by your DRM are still boned.Developers : Yeah , but that was much better than using no DRM , right ? It 's broken anyway .
Use a disc check and/or serial number ( no crazy copy protection ) .
Customer far less likely to be harmed , game works forever .
No change for pirates , except in the case of crackers who do n't get all the " glory " for taking down horrible DRM .
( Funny , the Captcha was " DREADED " .
How appropriate for commentary on DRM .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love how everyone bashes DRM without thinking of the consequences of not using any.Hmmm...Developers: Let's use the most anti-customer draconian abusive DRM technology currently allows, no matter how much it hurts our loyal paying customers.Person with a brain: Your DRM was cracked in less than 24 hours and all of your paying customers who were not scared off by your DRM are still boned.Developers: Yeah, but that was much better than using no DRM, right?It's broken anyway.
Use a disc check and/or serial number (no crazy copy protection).
Customer far less likely to be harmed, game works forever.
No change for pirates, except in the case of crackers who don't get all the "glory" for taking down horrible DRM.
(Funny, the Captcha was "DREADED".
How appropriate for commentary on DRM.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367506</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1267725960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think what you meant to say is that uploading an MP3 when you don't own the copyright is clearly illegal, while downloading an MP3 you own is legally an unknown.</p><p>An online streaming music service (My.mp3.com) was shut down because it provided copyrighted music - even though the service checked to make sure you were licensed by requiring you to register the personal CD.  So you can listen to you music online, anywhere, and not have to search for the CD.  So they had to shut down, but the idea of downloading music you own was not tested in that case - only the right of the company to upload (which was determined to be nonexistent).</p><p>MAFIAA cases are based on uploading.  Even their specious "making available" claim was based on the uploader being the copy provider, ignoring downloads.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what you meant to say is that uploading an MP3 when you do n't own the copyright is clearly illegal , while downloading an MP3 you own is legally an unknown.An online streaming music service ( My.mp3.com ) was shut down because it provided copyrighted music - even though the service checked to make sure you were licensed by requiring you to register the personal CD .
So you can listen to you music online , anywhere , and not have to search for the CD .
So they had to shut down , but the idea of downloading music you own was not tested in that case - only the right of the company to upload ( which was determined to be nonexistent ) .MAFIAA cases are based on uploading .
Even their specious " making available " claim was based on the uploader being the copy provider , ignoring downloads.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what you meant to say is that uploading an MP3 when you don't own the copyright is clearly illegal, while downloading an MP3 you own is legally an unknown.An online streaming music service (My.mp3.com) was shut down because it provided copyrighted music - even though the service checked to make sure you were licensed by requiring you to register the personal CD.
So you can listen to you music online, anywhere, and not have to search for the CD.
So they had to shut down, but the idea of downloading music you own was not tested in that case - only the right of the company to upload (which was determined to be nonexistent).MAFIAA cases are based on uploading.
Even their specious "making available" claim was based on the uploader being the copy provider, ignoring downloads.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3.com [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367094</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373020</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1267814520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can only provide anecdotal evidence, but I will not buy any product that comes with DRM.  I've bought DRM'd products in the past thinking 'this allows me to use it in all of the ways that I want' and then been bitten later.  Now, it's just not worth my time.  I still occasionally play games that I bought in the early '90s; I won't buy something with a remote kill switch again.  </p><p>
I can't be bothered to deal with potential trojans either, so I don't pirate.  Lots of entertainment companies are happy to sell me their products without requiring DRM, so they get my money instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only provide anecdotal evidence , but I will not buy any product that comes with DRM .
I 've bought DRM 'd products in the past thinking 'this allows me to use it in all of the ways that I want ' and then been bitten later .
Now , it 's just not worth my time .
I still occasionally play games that I bought in the early '90s ; I wo n't buy something with a remote kill switch again .
I ca n't be bothered to deal with potential trojans either , so I do n't pirate .
Lots of entertainment companies are happy to sell me their products without requiring DRM , so they get my money instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only provide anecdotal evidence, but I will not buy any product that comes with DRM.
I've bought DRM'd products in the past thinking 'this allows me to use it in all of the ways that I want' and then been bitten later.
Now, it's just not worth my time.
I still occasionally play games that I bought in the early '90s; I won't buy something with a remote kill switch again.
I can't be bothered to deal with potential trojans either, so I don't pirate.
Lots of entertainment companies are happy to sell me their products without requiring DRM, so they get my money instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370244</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft claims it lacks features.</title>
	<author>Mashdar</author>
	<datestamp>1267800720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe they were using Microsoft's definition of feature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe they were using Microsoft 's definition of feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe they were using Microsoft's definition of feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592</id>
	<title>Normally vs. Now</title>
	<author>Voyager529</author>
	<datestamp>1267719420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Normally I actually pay for my games. In most cases, I do it the old school way - I buy physical discs from physical stores. Lately though, companies like Ubisoft seem like they're treating me like a criminal for giving them my money. At this point, they're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Normally I actually pay for my games .
In most cases , I do it the old school way - I buy physical discs from physical stores .
Lately though , companies like Ubisoft seem like they 're treating me like a criminal for giving them my money .
At this point , they 're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Normally I actually pay for my games.
In most cases, I do it the old school way - I buy physical discs from physical stores.
Lately though, companies like Ubisoft seem like they're treating me like a criminal for giving them my money.
At this point, they're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375226</id>
	<title>Re:Ubisoft hates Troops</title>
	<author>oneplus999</author>
	<datestamp>1267781580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hope this DRM fails and fails hard, if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer (not consumer).</p></div><p>Search and replace "assassin's creed" with "spore".  No, they will not learn.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope this DRM fails and fails hard , if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer ( not consumer ) .Search and replace " assassin 's creed " with " spore " .
No , they will not learn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope this DRM fails and fails hard, if only to scare other publishers away from something that is truly anti-customer (not consumer).Search and replace "assassin's creed" with "spore".
No, they will not learn.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366786</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267720800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, that's just dumb.</p><ul><li>You pay taxes.</li></ul><ul><li>Taxes fund war.</li></ul><ul><li>Innocent civilians are killed in war.</li></ul><p>Therefore, you are a direct contributor to murder?  Give me a break.  You don't kill civilians anymore than Ubisoft distributes malware (their own DRM notwithstanding).  We can shut down Ubisoft when you start serving your life sentence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , that 's just dumb.You pay taxes.Taxes fund war.Innocent civilians are killed in war.Therefore , you are a direct contributor to murder ?
Give me a break .
You do n't kill civilians anymore than Ubisoft distributes malware ( their own DRM notwithstanding ) .
We can shut down Ubisoft when you start serving your life sentence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, that's just dumb.You pay taxes.Taxes fund war.Innocent civilians are killed in war.Therefore, you are a direct contributor to murder?
Give me a break.
You don't kill civilians anymore than Ubisoft distributes malware (their own DRM notwithstanding).
We can shut down Ubisoft when you start serving your life sentence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371184</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>MaDeR</author>
	<datestamp>1267805640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye."<br>
Indie market will WARMLY welcome it. I don't think big game publishers can afford losing of PC gaming market.<br>
<br>
In other words, you are bullshitting, dear sir.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye .
" Indie market will WARMLY welcome it .
I do n't think big game publishers can afford losing of PC gaming market .
In other words , you are bullshitting , dear sir .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"and you can kiss PC gaming goodbye.
"
Indie market will WARMLY welcome it.
I don't think big game publishers can afford losing of PC gaming market.
In other words, you are bullshitting, dear sir.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367360</id>
	<title>Re:You're all dicks</title>
	<author>Zironic</author>
	<datestamp>1267724760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DRM doesn't affect pirates at all, they just crack use the 0-day crack and play their game perfectly DRM free so the only people that are actually affected are the genuine customers.</p><p>From the Pirates perspective, what's the difference between a 0-day crack and a DRM free game? That you have to copy one file manually?</p><p>This is the sad, horrifying truth of the singleplayer game market, regardless of your DRM you're pretty much forced to rely on the customer paying out of their sense of honor because your DRM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/will/ be cracked. (When it comes to multiplayer games the developers have access to the ultimate DRM that is centralized servers where they can make sure that each player has a unique cd-key)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DRM does n't affect pirates at all , they just crack use the 0-day crack and play their game perfectly DRM free so the only people that are actually affected are the genuine customers.From the Pirates perspective , what 's the difference between a 0-day crack and a DRM free game ?
That you have to copy one file manually ? This is the sad , horrifying truth of the singleplayer game market , regardless of your DRM you 're pretty much forced to rely on the customer paying out of their sense of honor because your DRM /will/ be cracked .
( When it comes to multiplayer games the developers have access to the ultimate DRM that is centralized servers where they can make sure that each player has a unique cd-key )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DRM doesn't affect pirates at all, they just crack use the 0-day crack and play their game perfectly DRM free so the only people that are actually affected are the genuine customers.From the Pirates perspective, what's the difference between a 0-day crack and a DRM free game?
That you have to copy one file manually?This is the sad, horrifying truth of the singleplayer game market, regardless of your DRM you're pretty much forced to rely on the customer paying out of their sense of honor because your DRM /will/ be cracked.
(When it comes to multiplayer games the developers have access to the ultimate DRM that is centralized servers where they can make sure that each player has a unique cd-key)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367328</id>
	<title>Re:Well, what a surprise</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1267724460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dont pirate but I dont support anti-consumer crap like this either.  Normally I will buy a game then get a no-cd crack but this one wont even get that..im just skipping it and all Ubisoft games.  It makes me kinda sad because I really wanted to play Splinter Cell Conviciton on my 360, but buying anything from them on any platform is excusing them for their actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont pirate but I dont support anti-consumer crap like this either .
Normally I will buy a game then get a no-cd crack but this one wont even get that..im just skipping it and all Ubisoft games .
It makes me kinda sad because I really wanted to play Splinter Cell Conviciton on my 360 , but buying anything from them on any platform is excusing them for their actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont pirate but I dont support anti-consumer crap like this either.
Normally I will buy a game then get a no-cd crack but this one wont even get that..im just skipping it and all Ubisoft games.
It makes me kinda sad because I really wanted to play Splinter Cell Conviciton on my 360, but buying anything from them on any platform is excusing them for their actions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367512</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267726020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about they just stick with Steam's DRM and call it a day?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about they just stick with Steam 's DRM and call it a day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about they just stick with Steam's DRM and call it a day?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371756</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1267808280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>(Mind you, in this country, it's legit for personal use.)</p></div></blockquote><p>Which country?</p><blockquote><div><p>DRM won't ever get you new sales.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Sure it will.  That's why companies love cloud-computing.  It's DRM that works.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( Mind you , in this country , it 's legit for personal use .
) Which country ? DRM wo n't ever get you new sales .
Sure it will .
That 's why companies love cloud-computing .
It 's DRM that works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Mind you, in this country, it's legit for personal use.
)Which country?DRM won't ever get you new sales.
Sure it will.
That's why companies love cloud-computing.
It's DRM that works.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366462</id>
	<title>frosty piss</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>frist psot</htmltext>
<tokenext>frist psot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>frist psot</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368886</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1267786080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think some people at UBISOFT should read Dilbert more often...<br>This is practical Dilbert practice what they applied here, and speaking of lost sales<br>they probably already lost more sales over the DRM scheme than it cost them to even implement it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think some people at UBISOFT should read Dilbert more often...This is practical Dilbert practice what they applied here , and speaking of lost salesthey probably already lost more sales over the DRM scheme than it cost them to even implement it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think some people at UBISOFT should read Dilbert more often...This is practical Dilbert practice what they applied here, and speaking of lost salesthey probably already lost more sales over the DRM scheme than it cost them to even implement it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369466</id>
	<title>Re:Is DRM socially irresponsible?</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1267793400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course it is. But since when are companies socially responsible?</p><p>If companies were people, we'd call them sociopaths. No, the <b>law</b> must force companies to abide by acceptable standards of behavior. A company will do everything it can, ethical or not, to maximize profit while staying in the bounds of the law. Therefore, to change behavior, the <b>law</b> must change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it is .
But since when are companies socially responsible ? If companies were people , we 'd call them sociopaths .
No , the law must force companies to abide by acceptable standards of behavior .
A company will do everything it can , ethical or not , to maximize profit while staying in the bounds of the law .
Therefore , to change behavior , the law must change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it is.
But since when are companies socially responsible?If companies were people, we'd call them sociopaths.
No, the law must force companies to abide by acceptable standards of behavior.
A company will do everything it can, ethical or not, to maximize profit while staying in the bounds of the law.
Therefore, to change behavior, the law must change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368302</id>
	<title>Cloud games</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267821420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about cloud games and pay-per-hour?<br>I want to play in my Netbook powered Linux an original game without DRM. This would be amazing and it's plausible!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about cloud games and pay-per-hour ? I want to play in my Netbook powered Linux an original game without DRM .
This would be amazing and it 's plausible !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about cloud games and pay-per-hour?I want to play in my Netbook powered Linux an original game without DRM.
This would be amazing and it's plausible!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371284</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267806060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the 20+ years of down loading things from the "scene".  I have have never ever, not once, exactly zero times received a virus, trojan, or any type of malware.</p><p>You should a fundamental lack of understanding about how the scene works.  Releases are put out by different groups.  These groups care about their reputation.  Greatly.  The scene talks.  The scene has politics and drama.  The scene would not put up with someone releasing malware.  It's a community.</p><p>I'm not saying malware isn't out there.  Hell peopleofwalmart.com infected two desktops here last week.  Sure people who download from some random link on google are going to get bit.  Limewire and Bearshare installed malware as part of the program.  People agreed to the malware.  If you find an established community you don't even think about dealing with this stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the 20 + years of down loading things from the " scene " .
I have have never ever , not once , exactly zero times received a virus , trojan , or any type of malware.You should a fundamental lack of understanding about how the scene works .
Releases are put out by different groups .
These groups care about their reputation .
Greatly. The scene talks .
The scene has politics and drama .
The scene would not put up with someone releasing malware .
It 's a community.I 'm not saying malware is n't out there .
Hell peopleofwalmart.com infected two desktops here last week .
Sure people who download from some random link on google are going to get bit .
Limewire and Bearshare installed malware as part of the program .
People agreed to the malware .
If you find an established community you do n't even think about dealing with this stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the 20+ years of down loading things from the "scene".
I have have never ever, not once, exactly zero times received a virus, trojan, or any type of malware.You should a fundamental lack of understanding about how the scene works.
Releases are put out by different groups.
These groups care about their reputation.
Greatly.  The scene talks.
The scene has politics and drama.
The scene would not put up with someone releasing malware.
It's a community.I'm not saying malware isn't out there.
Hell peopleofwalmart.com infected two desktops here last week.
Sure people who download from some random link on google are going to get bit.
Limewire and Bearshare installed malware as part of the program.
People agreed to the malware.
If you find an established community you don't even think about dealing with this stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472</id>
	<title>Surprise!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or maybe not...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe not.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe not...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366986</id>
	<title>Re:On the bright side...</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1267722060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.</p></div><p>Failed or not, business costs are pretty much always tax free - you only pay tax on profits.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft can always blame " those damn pirates " and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.Failed or not , business costs are pretty much always tax free - you only pay tax on profits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft can always blame "those damn pirates" and claim the DRM development as a failed project tax write off.Failed or not, business costs are pretty much always tax free - you only pay tax on profits.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368828</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>complete loony</author>
	<datestamp>1267785240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In that case, the most trivial of restrictions would suffice. You don't need to tie each person to an internet connection. Just a simple generated key check would be enough of a road block for most people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In that case , the most trivial of restrictions would suffice .
You do n't need to tie each person to an internet connection .
Just a simple generated key check would be enough of a road block for most people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In that case, the most trivial of restrictions would suffice.
You don't need to tie each person to an internet connection.
Just a simple generated key check would be enough of a road block for most people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369034</id>
	<title>So now it's "Ubisoft Awful Anti-Pirate System..."</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1267787700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that is utterly worthless to boot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that is utterly worthless to boot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that is utterly worthless to boot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369020</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1267787460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think there are possibly two tiers of copying though.</p><p>When I was a kid, the (ZX Spectrum) games were on audio tapes. Almost every kid I knew who was into games had a twin tape deck. This produced an imperfect analogue copy of the game and obvious wasn't much good for more than one or two generations.</p><p>A smaller subset had a Multiface, which was basically a hardware non-maskable interrupt generator - it would halt your machine and swap a few kilobytes of the RAM for a debugger - which just happened to have a facility to dump the running state to tape - who'd a thunk that this would get used for piracy! This produced a copy that was as good as your tape hardware. You could even use an audio encoding that was much faster than the original game media (with somewhat mixed results on bad hardware).</p><p>We didn't have the internet, or things would have been much easier - most of the difficulty of piracy back then was finding a kid that a) had the game you wanted and b) liked you enough to let you copy it. Some years later, I found myself immensely pleased with how easy it was to download archived Spectrum games from Norwegian FTP sites - largely because a game that used to take 4 minutes to load into the computer was taking around 4 seconds to download.</p><p>In the modern world... a game with zero DRM can be copied just by shoving in a flash drive. This is the same "playground" level of piracy - easy, social, no consequences, and essentially free of cost. People thought no more about doing it than they thought about making mix tapes for friends.</p><p>For DRM<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,the cracking groups will remove it anyway. But to get their product, you have to search online, download large amounts of data, take the risk that someone shoved a trojan into the installer, take the risk that it's actually 4GB of Estonian donkey porn, etc. Which is a fixed cost regardless of how expensive the DRM was.</p><p>And it's a higher cost than saying "Hey Chuck, I hear you got Estonian Donkey Smasher II, mind if I copy that?" and copying it onto your USB drive, which will be faster and have lower risk. I know people who trade NDS ROMS like this 16GB at a time (you need a special device to take advantage of this, but unlike the Multiface, it doesn't cost about 4 times what the games cost).</p><p>When I was a kid and pirated games like crazy, I couldn't afford to buy them. Back then, the cost getting a pirate copy was low compared to the &pound;10 or &pound;20 (in 80s money) that I just didn't have.</p><p>These days, I buy my games, because the price of the game is low compared to the hassle of finding a copy from a reputable cracking crew, working out who's a reputable cracking crew in the first place, downloading it, etc, etc etc. And because I think artists deserve to be compensated. The glaring exception is NDS games... I'll pirate them first in general ; and I don't feel guilty because most of them are utter trash, and no way am I taking the &pound;20 hit of buying them, playing them for 20 minutes, finding out they're crap, and selling them back to the game store so they can do the same thing to some other poor sucker. Things I actually enjoy like Zelda and Professor Layton get bought, new and not pre-owned. The DS has a "demo" facility where you use the WiFi link to try things out in stores, but none of the UK stores run demos.</p><p>When I was a kid, I didn't have anything to offer them, so I feel no guilt about my years of piracy - I was too young to have a job and there's no way in hell that my parents would have paid for my games habit.</p><p>I find a small amount of DRM acceptible (just enough to make it difficult to "casually" copy is fine by me), but it gets too much when the game won't run reliably because of the extremely edgy disk checks or whatever. I liked Assassins Creed, but there's no way I'm buying the sequel.</p><p>So I agree - there's no point in them shelling out top dollar for the latest most heinous DRM. They should put on something basic, reliable and cheap, just to prevent "playground" piracy. And they should make games that 30-something professionals want to buy, rather than snot-nosed kids, because they are the guys who have i) enough money to buy games ii) not enough time to screw around securing a pirate copy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think there are possibly two tiers of copying though.When I was a kid , the ( ZX Spectrum ) games were on audio tapes .
Almost every kid I knew who was into games had a twin tape deck .
This produced an imperfect analogue copy of the game and obvious was n't much good for more than one or two generations.A smaller subset had a Multiface , which was basically a hardware non-maskable interrupt generator - it would halt your machine and swap a few kilobytes of the RAM for a debugger - which just happened to have a facility to dump the running state to tape - who 'd a thunk that this would get used for piracy !
This produced a copy that was as good as your tape hardware .
You could even use an audio encoding that was much faster than the original game media ( with somewhat mixed results on bad hardware ) .We did n't have the internet , or things would have been much easier - most of the difficulty of piracy back then was finding a kid that a ) had the game you wanted and b ) liked you enough to let you copy it .
Some years later , I found myself immensely pleased with how easy it was to download archived Spectrum games from Norwegian FTP sites - largely because a game that used to take 4 minutes to load into the computer was taking around 4 seconds to download.In the modern world... a game with zero DRM can be copied just by shoving in a flash drive .
This is the same " playground " level of piracy - easy , social , no consequences , and essentially free of cost .
People thought no more about doing it than they thought about making mix tapes for friends.For DRM ,the cracking groups will remove it anyway .
But to get their product , you have to search online , download large amounts of data , take the risk that someone shoved a trojan into the installer , take the risk that it 's actually 4GB of Estonian donkey porn , etc .
Which is a fixed cost regardless of how expensive the DRM was.And it 's a higher cost than saying " Hey Chuck , I hear you got Estonian Donkey Smasher II , mind if I copy that ?
" and copying it onto your USB drive , which will be faster and have lower risk .
I know people who trade NDS ROMS like this 16GB at a time ( you need a special device to take advantage of this , but unlike the Multiface , it does n't cost about 4 times what the games cost ) .When I was a kid and pirated games like crazy , I could n't afford to buy them .
Back then , the cost getting a pirate copy was low compared to the   10 or   20 ( in 80s money ) that I just did n't have.These days , I buy my games , because the price of the game is low compared to the hassle of finding a copy from a reputable cracking crew , working out who 's a reputable cracking crew in the first place , downloading it , etc , etc etc .
And because I think artists deserve to be compensated .
The glaring exception is NDS games... I 'll pirate them first in general ; and I do n't feel guilty because most of them are utter trash , and no way am I taking the   20 hit of buying them , playing them for 20 minutes , finding out they 're crap , and selling them back to the game store so they can do the same thing to some other poor sucker .
Things I actually enjoy like Zelda and Professor Layton get bought , new and not pre-owned .
The DS has a " demo " facility where you use the WiFi link to try things out in stores , but none of the UK stores run demos.When I was a kid , I did n't have anything to offer them , so I feel no guilt about my years of piracy - I was too young to have a job and there 's no way in hell that my parents would have paid for my games habit.I find a small amount of DRM acceptible ( just enough to make it difficult to " casually " copy is fine by me ) , but it gets too much when the game wo n't run reliably because of the extremely edgy disk checks or whatever .
I liked Assassins Creed , but there 's no way I 'm buying the sequel.So I agree - there 's no point in them shelling out top dollar for the latest most heinous DRM .
They should put on something basic , reliable and cheap , just to prevent " playground " piracy .
And they should make games that 30-something professionals want to buy , rather than snot-nosed kids , because they are the guys who have i ) enough money to buy games ii ) not enough time to screw around securing a pirate copy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think there are possibly two tiers of copying though.When I was a kid, the (ZX Spectrum) games were on audio tapes.
Almost every kid I knew who was into games had a twin tape deck.
This produced an imperfect analogue copy of the game and obvious wasn't much good for more than one or two generations.A smaller subset had a Multiface, which was basically a hardware non-maskable interrupt generator - it would halt your machine and swap a few kilobytes of the RAM for a debugger - which just happened to have a facility to dump the running state to tape - who'd a thunk that this would get used for piracy!
This produced a copy that was as good as your tape hardware.
You could even use an audio encoding that was much faster than the original game media (with somewhat mixed results on bad hardware).We didn't have the internet, or things would have been much easier - most of the difficulty of piracy back then was finding a kid that a) had the game you wanted and b) liked you enough to let you copy it.
Some years later, I found myself immensely pleased with how easy it was to download archived Spectrum games from Norwegian FTP sites - largely because a game that used to take 4 minutes to load into the computer was taking around 4 seconds to download.In the modern world... a game with zero DRM can be copied just by shoving in a flash drive.
This is the same "playground" level of piracy - easy, social, no consequences, and essentially free of cost.
People thought no more about doing it than they thought about making mix tapes for friends.For DRM ,the cracking groups will remove it anyway.
But to get their product, you have to search online, download large amounts of data, take the risk that someone shoved a trojan into the installer, take the risk that it's actually 4GB of Estonian donkey porn, etc.
Which is a fixed cost regardless of how expensive the DRM was.And it's a higher cost than saying "Hey Chuck, I hear you got Estonian Donkey Smasher II, mind if I copy that?
" and copying it onto your USB drive, which will be faster and have lower risk.
I know people who trade NDS ROMS like this 16GB at a time (you need a special device to take advantage of this, but unlike the Multiface, it doesn't cost about 4 times what the games cost).When I was a kid and pirated games like crazy, I couldn't afford to buy them.
Back then, the cost getting a pirate copy was low compared to the £10 or £20 (in 80s money) that I just didn't have.These days, I buy my games, because the price of the game is low compared to the hassle of finding a copy from a reputable cracking crew, working out who's a reputable cracking crew in the first place, downloading it, etc, etc etc.
And because I think artists deserve to be compensated.
The glaring exception is NDS games... I'll pirate them first in general ; and I don't feel guilty because most of them are utter trash, and no way am I taking the £20 hit of buying them, playing them for 20 minutes, finding out they're crap, and selling them back to the game store so they can do the same thing to some other poor sucker.
Things I actually enjoy like Zelda and Professor Layton get bought, new and not pre-owned.
The DS has a "demo" facility where you use the WiFi link to try things out in stores, but none of the UK stores run demos.When I was a kid, I didn't have anything to offer them, so I feel no guilt about my years of piracy - I was too young to have a job and there's no way in hell that my parents would have paid for my games habit.I find a small amount of DRM acceptible (just enough to make it difficult to "casually" copy is fine by me), but it gets too much when the game won't run reliably because of the extremely edgy disk checks or whatever.
I liked Assassins Creed, but there's no way I'm buying the sequel.So I agree - there's no point in them shelling out top dollar for the latest most heinous DRM.
They should put on something basic, reliable and cheap, just to prevent "playground" piracy.
And they should make games that 30-something professionals want to buy, rather than snot-nosed kids, because they are the guys who have i) enough money to buy games ii) not enough time to screw around securing a pirate copy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366642</id>
	<title>fail</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1267719780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>from a typical business mind set i can totally see why software houses do DRM. the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on don't actually apply all that well to digital media. there is an infinate supply, and demand can change in a single day, based on a one news article.<p>
instead of focusing on selling goods, they should suck it up and realise they are selling a service and model themselfs around the hospitality industry where customer satisfaction is king.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from a typical business mind set i can totally see why software houses do DRM .
the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on do n't actually apply all that well to digital media .
there is an infinate supply , and demand can change in a single day , based on a one news article .
instead of focusing on selling goods , they should suck it up and realise they are selling a service and model themselfs around the hospitality industry where customer satisfaction is king .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from a typical business mind set i can totally see why software houses do DRM.
the problem is that the supply and demand models that our businesses run on don't actually apply all that well to digital media.
there is an infinate supply, and demand can change in a single day, based on a one news article.
instead of focusing on selling goods, they should suck it up and realise they are selling a service and model themselfs around the hospitality industry where customer satisfaction is king.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369376</id>
	<title>Re:It only takes one.</title>
	<author>selven</author>
	<datestamp>1267792260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The interesting thing is that for crimes that are easy to do and get away with, like uploading files (I realize that's not a crime, but bear with me) and shoplifting chocolate bars is that psychology is the best defense. Shaming potential thieves by putting up a "please don't do it" sign actually works. Putting in technological defenses does nothing and also attracts the kind of people who are interested in a challenge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The interesting thing is that for crimes that are easy to do and get away with , like uploading files ( I realize that 's not a crime , but bear with me ) and shoplifting chocolate bars is that psychology is the best defense .
Shaming potential thieves by putting up a " please do n't do it " sign actually works .
Putting in technological defenses does nothing and also attracts the kind of people who are interested in a challenge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The interesting thing is that for crimes that are easy to do and get away with, like uploading files (I realize that's not a crime, but bear with me) and shoplifting chocolate bars is that psychology is the best defense.
Shaming potential thieves by putting up a "please don't do it" sign actually works.
Putting in technological defenses does nothing and also attracts the kind of people who are interested in a challenge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375710</id>
	<title>99,7\% ?</title>
	<author>clarkie.mg</author>
	<datestamp>1267784400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To be honest, I don't think you get it. How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?</p> </div><p>To be honest, I don't think you get it. Do you think a company would bother developing DRM schemes if 99,7\% of the buyers didn't care and bought whatever they can ?</p><p><a href="http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_4.html" title="tweakguides.com">http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_4.html</a> [tweakguides.com] :<br><i>The report concludes that "...by the end of 2007, there were more than one billion PCs installed around the world; nearly half have pirated software on them."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... For 2009, the most pirated PC game as reported in this article was Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. The PC version had a staggering 4.1 million downloads via torrents alone compared with an estimated 200,000 - 300,000 actual sales via retail and Steam</i></p><p><a href="http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_8.html" title="tweakguides.com">http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_8.html</a> [tweakguides.com] :<br><i>As yet another example of removing DRM not leading to any reduction in piracy, the game Demigod has been pirated so heavily in its initial release period that it has caused the game's servers to effectively go down. Out of the 120,000 connections made to the game's servers, over 100,000 were by confirmed pirates, leaving only around 18,000 legitimate purchasers.</i></p><p>Very interesting article.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be honest , I do n't think you get it .
How many regular , normal users are going to google/torrent the hack ?
To be honest , I do n't think you get it .
Do you think a company would bother developing DRM schemes if 99,7 \ % of the buyers did n't care and bought whatever they can ? http : //www.tweakguides.com/Piracy \ _4.html [ tweakguides.com ] : The report concludes that " ...by the end of 2007 , there were more than one billion PCs installed around the world ; nearly half have pirated software on them .
" ... For 2009 , the most pirated PC game as reported in this article was Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 2 .
The PC version had a staggering 4.1 million downloads via torrents alone compared with an estimated 200,000 - 300,000 actual sales via retail and Steamhttp : //www.tweakguides.com/Piracy \ _8.html [ tweakguides.com ] : As yet another example of removing DRM not leading to any reduction in piracy , the game Demigod has been pirated so heavily in its initial release period that it has caused the game 's servers to effectively go down .
Out of the 120,000 connections made to the game 's servers , over 100,000 were by confirmed pirates , leaving only around 18,000 legitimate purchasers.Very interesting article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be honest, I don't think you get it.
How many regular, normal users are going to google/torrent the hack?
To be honest, I don't think you get it.
Do you think a company would bother developing DRM schemes if 99,7\% of the buyers didn't care and bought whatever they can ?http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_4.html [tweakguides.com] :The report concludes that "...by the end of 2007, there were more than one billion PCs installed around the world; nearly half have pirated software on them.
" ... For 2009, the most pirated PC game as reported in this article was Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
The PC version had a staggering 4.1 million downloads via torrents alone compared with an estimated 200,000 - 300,000 actual sales via retail and Steamhttp://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy\_8.html [tweakguides.com] :As yet another example of removing DRM not leading to any reduction in piracy, the game Demigod has been pirated so heavily in its initial release period that it has caused the game's servers to effectively go down.
Out of the 120,000 connections made to the game's servers, over 100,000 were by confirmed pirates, leaving only around 18,000 legitimate purchasers.Very interesting article.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371672</id>
	<title>Where is the obligatory Simpsons quote?</title>
	<author>Holammer</author>
	<datestamp>1267807860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Ha Ha!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Ha Ha !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Ha Ha!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369044</id>
	<title>Re:Normally vs. Now</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1267787820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At this point, they're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right.</p></div></blockquote><p>Really? Physically, they're not. You have to wait for half a day before the DRM is cracked, as opposed to the hour it takes to drive to the nearest store and copy the disc.</p><p>Morally? Perhaps, but it depends on your morality. It certainly doesn't square in mine. The way I see it, pirating a product thanks to restrictive DRM, as opposed to choosing not to buy it, is a little like beating the shit out of an attacker then robbing him instead of just beating the shit out of him. The extra self-indulgent flourish is a little excessive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At this point , they 're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right.Really ?
Physically , they 're not .
You have to wait for half a day before the DRM is cracked , as opposed to the hour it takes to drive to the nearest store and copy the disc.Morally ?
Perhaps , but it depends on your morality .
It certainly does n't square in mine .
The way I see it , pirating a product thanks to restrictive DRM , as opposed to choosing not to buy it , is a little like beating the shit out of an attacker then robbing him instead of just beating the shit out of him .
The extra self-indulgent flourish is a little excessive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At this point, they're really making it more convenient for me to prove them right.Really?
Physically, they're not.
You have to wait for half a day before the DRM is cracked, as opposed to the hour it takes to drive to the nearest store and copy the disc.Morally?
Perhaps, but it depends on your morality.
It certainly doesn't square in mine.
The way I see it, pirating a product thanks to restrictive DRM, as opposed to choosing not to buy it, is a little like beating the shit out of an attacker then robbing him instead of just beating the shit out of him.
The extra self-indulgent flourish is a little excessive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368072</id>
	<title>Re:Surprise!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267732200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe someone modded me off topic for saying this was going to happen in the last Slashdot story....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe someone modded me off topic for saying this was going to happen in the last Slashdot story... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe someone modded me off topic for saying this was going to happen in the last Slashdot story....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367556</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1267726440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Youd get someone who would crack it simply to troll everyone else and ruin it for the cancer researchers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Youd get someone who would crack it simply to troll everyone else and ruin it for the cancer researchers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Youd get someone who would crack it simply to troll everyone else and ruin it for the cancer researchers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368946</id>
	<title>Not all it was made out to be.</title>
	<author>Alkonaut</author>
	<datestamp>1267786800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
If it was "cracked in one day" then this DRM scheme wasn't all it was made out to be. It was a simple "cd-check" style DRM that could be cracked by simply removing the checking from the code, or by creating a local server responding in the way the game expects. A <i>real</i> DRM scheme requiring permanent internet connection would of course not include the whole game in the installer, period. The best idea would be to have logic such as NPC AI hosted on remote servers.
</p><p>
I just don't buy that "all DRM will always be cracked within a day". For media perhaps, because of the analog hole. But for logic, you simply can't crack code that you don't have on your computer. You can circumvent it by writing another implementation, but at that point you just cannot be sure that the cracked version is all that the original is. DRM is here to stay, and for games (unlike for media), creating an undefeatable DRM should be <i>really</i> simple, by simply keeping half the product on the sellers side.
</p><p>
The other argument is that all DRM is evil because it is an inconvenience for paying customers and not for the pirates. That may be true, but that is just a fact of life. Inconvenience for honest people is created by dishonest people. The lock on your front door is that kind of inconvenience. You could refuse to buy a door with a lock in it if you want to (since you don't like that YOU are inconvenienced by someone elses dishonesty). But you don't. You buy the door with the lock and never think twice about it.
</p><p>
As far as "permanent internet connection" is concerned, it's just not an inconvenience anymore. Internet connection to a computer is the same as an electricity connection. My computer is completely useless without power, and all but useless without an internet connection. If the power goes down I could whine about the game not saving checkpoints often enough. The same could hold for internet connection. Sure, the electricity requirement is a true requirement while the internet connection is artificial, but it would not annoy me any more when my savegame is lost because of internet outage or a graphics driver failure than when it is lost because of a power blackout.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was " cracked in one day " then this DRM scheme was n't all it was made out to be .
It was a simple " cd-check " style DRM that could be cracked by simply removing the checking from the code , or by creating a local server responding in the way the game expects .
A real DRM scheme requiring permanent internet connection would of course not include the whole game in the installer , period .
The best idea would be to have logic such as NPC AI hosted on remote servers .
I just do n't buy that " all DRM will always be cracked within a day " .
For media perhaps , because of the analog hole .
But for logic , you simply ca n't crack code that you do n't have on your computer .
You can circumvent it by writing another implementation , but at that point you just can not be sure that the cracked version is all that the original is .
DRM is here to stay , and for games ( unlike for media ) , creating an undefeatable DRM should be really simple , by simply keeping half the product on the sellers side .
The other argument is that all DRM is evil because it is an inconvenience for paying customers and not for the pirates .
That may be true , but that is just a fact of life .
Inconvenience for honest people is created by dishonest people .
The lock on your front door is that kind of inconvenience .
You could refuse to buy a door with a lock in it if you want to ( since you do n't like that YOU are inconvenienced by someone elses dishonesty ) .
But you do n't .
You buy the door with the lock and never think twice about it .
As far as " permanent internet connection " is concerned , it 's just not an inconvenience anymore .
Internet connection to a computer is the same as an electricity connection .
My computer is completely useless without power , and all but useless without an internet connection .
If the power goes down I could whine about the game not saving checkpoints often enough .
The same could hold for internet connection .
Sure , the electricity requirement is a true requirement while the internet connection is artificial , but it would not annoy me any more when my savegame is lost because of internet outage or a graphics driver failure than when it is lost because of a power blackout .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If it was "cracked in one day" then this DRM scheme wasn't all it was made out to be.
It was a simple "cd-check" style DRM that could be cracked by simply removing the checking from the code, or by creating a local server responding in the way the game expects.
A real DRM scheme requiring permanent internet connection would of course not include the whole game in the installer, period.
The best idea would be to have logic such as NPC AI hosted on remote servers.
I just don't buy that "all DRM will always be cracked within a day".
For media perhaps, because of the analog hole.
But for logic, you simply can't crack code that you don't have on your computer.
You can circumvent it by writing another implementation, but at that point you just cannot be sure that the cracked version is all that the original is.
DRM is here to stay, and for games (unlike for media), creating an undefeatable DRM should be really simple, by simply keeping half the product on the sellers side.
The other argument is that all DRM is evil because it is an inconvenience for paying customers and not for the pirates.
That may be true, but that is just a fact of life.
Inconvenience for honest people is created by dishonest people.
The lock on your front door is that kind of inconvenience.
You could refuse to buy a door with a lock in it if you want to (since you don't like that YOU are inconvenienced by someone elses dishonesty).
But you don't.
You buy the door with the lock and never think twice about it.
As far as "permanent internet connection" is concerned, it's just not an inconvenience anymore.
Internet connection to a computer is the same as an electricity connection.
My computer is completely useless without power, and all but useless without an internet connection.
If the power goes down I could whine about the game not saving checkpoints often enough.
The same could hold for internet connection.
Sure, the electricity requirement is a true requirement while the internet connection is artificial, but it would not annoy me any more when my savegame is lost because of internet outage or a graphics driver failure than when it is lost because of a power blackout.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366652</id>
	<title>nfo file</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I noticed the quoted nfo file on TFA's page. It made me wonder how many people out there only ever see nfo files as random bizarre characters with no alignment, rather than the relatively aesthetically pleasing monospace-font designed pages that they really are. Case in point, compare the quoted block in the article with <a href="http://nfohump.com/index.php?switchto=nfos&amp;menu=quicknav&amp;item=viewnfo&amp;id=143849" title="nfohump.com" rel="nofollow">this.</a> [nfohump.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I noticed the quoted nfo file on TFA 's page .
It made me wonder how many people out there only ever see nfo files as random bizarre characters with no alignment , rather than the relatively aesthetically pleasing monospace-font designed pages that they really are .
Case in point , compare the quoted block in the article with this .
[ nfohump.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I noticed the quoted nfo file on TFA's page.
It made me wonder how many people out there only ever see nfo files as random bizarre characters with no alignment, rather than the relatively aesthetically pleasing monospace-font designed pages that they really are.
Case in point, compare the quoted block in the article with this.
[nfohump.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373932</id>
	<title>Re:Remote Server Execution could work as DRM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267818660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This increases the complexity and cost and bandwidth and dev time and support time and debugging of the solution by at least an order of magnitude.  Maybe multiple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This increases the complexity and cost and bandwidth and dev time and support time and debugging of the solution by at least an order of magnitude .
Maybe multiple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This increases the complexity and cost and bandwidth and dev time and support time and debugging of the solution by at least an order of magnitude.
Maybe multiple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371348</id>
	<title>Re:Human deterrent</title>
	<author>yk4ever</author>
	<datestamp>1267806420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I reckon that "cancer research" and "carbon footprint" are most fashionable toys that filthy-wealthy westerners enjoy nowadays?</p><p>Nice ivory tower you have, guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I reckon that " cancer research " and " carbon footprint " are most fashionable toys that filthy-wealthy westerners enjoy nowadays ? Nice ivory tower you have , guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I reckon that "cancer research" and "carbon footprint" are most fashionable toys that filthy-wealthy westerners enjoy nowadays?Nice ivory tower you have, guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_139</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_147</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31404054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_144</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_141</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31393384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_152</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_136</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_146</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_151</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_149</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_135</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_143</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_140</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_138</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_148</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_142</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_137</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369466
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_145</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_150</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31376740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_027258_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31404054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370976
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371332
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367836
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368770
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370288
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369322
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368004
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368794
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371402
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374184
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372292
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371284
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368626
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371756
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372248
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373020
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368828
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371190
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375710
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373658
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368560
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368940
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367796
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371440
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368610
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31376740
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368886
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368502
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369528
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369966
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31393384
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368110
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370072
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369376
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367838
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366934
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367298
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368170
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368712
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373138
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371126
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368806
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31375208
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369066
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370928
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31371478
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369954
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31373806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366588
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366894
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367150
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367094
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367506
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366754
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367964
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367524
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367308
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367546
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31370182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31366922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367410
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31368722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31367882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_027258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31369328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31372946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_027258.31374924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
