<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_19_1928244</id>
	<title>Company Sued, Loses For Not Using Patented Tech</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1268989560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:bdc\_tggr-forums@yahoo.com" rel="nofollow">bdcrazy</a> writes <i>"A man was recently <a href="http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2010/03/sawstop\_saw\_brake\_safety\_devic.html">awarded $1.5M in a jury trial</a> after his hand was injured by a Ryobi table saw. The saw did not include the patented 'Saw Stop' technology that the plaintiff argued would have prevented all the problems."</i> 60 similar cases have now been filed nationwide. TechDirt makes the argument that <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1240568623.shtml">this jury decision is completely crazy</a>: "If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology, it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place." If the decision stands, not only will the price of table saws go way up, but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye.</htmltext>
<tokenext>bdcrazy writes " A man was recently awarded $ 1.5M in a jury trial after his hand was injured by a Ryobi table saw .
The saw did not include the patented 'Saw Stop ' technology that the plaintiff argued would have prevented all the problems .
" 60 similar cases have now been filed nationwide .
TechDirt makes the argument that this jury decision is completely crazy : " If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology , it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place .
" If the decision stands , not only will the price of table saws go way up , but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bdcrazy writes "A man was recently awarded $1.5M in a jury trial after his hand was injured by a Ryobi table saw.
The saw did not include the patented 'Saw Stop' technology that the plaintiff argued would have prevented all the problems.
" 60 similar cases have now been filed nationwide.
TechDirt makes the argument that this jury decision is completely crazy: "If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology, it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place.
" If the decision stands, not only will the price of table saws go way up, but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544760</id>
	<title>The people behind "Saw Stop" originally tried ...</title>
	<author>quax</author>
	<datestamp>1268997420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... to get leading manufactures to adopt their technology.  Only after there was no taker did they decide to start a table saw company of their own.  This story can be gleaned from <a href="http://www.sawstop.com/company/story.php" title="sawstop.com">their own website</a> [sawstop.com].</p><p>I also remember an interview with the inventor from several years ago where he voiced his frustration that none of the leading manufacturers where interested in the technology. Unfortunately I can no longer find this interview but <a href="http://forums.jlconline.com/forums/showpost.php?s=eff78d0a22fda8805b601e8216e2f1be&amp;p=366484&amp;postcount=13" title="jlconline.com">I am not the only one remembering it</a> [jlconline.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... to get leading manufactures to adopt their technology .
Only after there was no taker did they decide to start a table saw company of their own .
This story can be gleaned from their own website [ sawstop.com ] .I also remember an interview with the inventor from several years ago where he voiced his frustration that none of the leading manufacturers where interested in the technology .
Unfortunately I can no longer find this interview but I am not the only one remembering it [ jlconline.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... to get leading manufactures to adopt their technology.
Only after there was no taker did they decide to start a table saw company of their own.
This story can be gleaned from their own website [sawstop.com].I also remember an interview with the inventor from several years ago where he voiced his frustration that none of the leading manufacturers where interested in the technology.
Unfortunately I can no longer find this interview but I am not the only one remembering it [jlconline.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</id>
	<title>Not again...</title>
	<author>CajunArson</author>
	<datestamp>1268993640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot and the Law: Unsafe at any speed.</p><p>It's been years since I was in Torts class, but this is a product liability suit... NOT a patent suit.  The only reason the "patent" is being bandied about is because this guy's argument boils down to this:  Riyobi knew (or should have known) that there was a safer way to make the saw.  Riyobi presumably did not choose the safer way.  Therefore, Riyobi should be liable for my injury.</p><p>Note that this argument <b>by itself</b> is nowhere near sufficient to win a product liability lawsuit.  For example, it's easy to say that you could make any car safer by preventing it from going over 5mph, but just throwing that fact out in court by itself will never win a product liability case.  Usually there are lots of extra factors like industry standards and cost-benefit analyzes that are argued over by lots of expert witnesses. Could Riyobi have "reasonably" adopted the improved design? etc. etc.</p><p>The ONLY reason that a patent has anything important to do with this case is that patents are, by definition, publicly available and it makes an easy argument to show that Riyobi knew or could have known about what was disclosed in the patent.  Also, there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent.  Instead, the safety system is just an example of what is known, and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better.  The patent was likely just one data point of MANY data points used to establish what a "reasonable" safety system would look like.  One interesting point would be to see if Riyobi itself is the assignee of the patent....</p><p>In a nutshell: Don't read too much into this case.  Like most legal cases discussed on Slashdot, somebody saw a buzzword like "patent" and wanted to score points with the mouthbreathing site admins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot and the Law : Unsafe at any speed.It 's been years since I was in Torts class , but this is a product liability suit... NOT a patent suit .
The only reason the " patent " is being bandied about is because this guy 's argument boils down to this : Riyobi knew ( or should have known ) that there was a safer way to make the saw .
Riyobi presumably did not choose the safer way .
Therefore , Riyobi should be liable for my injury.Note that this argument by itself is nowhere near sufficient to win a product liability lawsuit .
For example , it 's easy to say that you could make any car safer by preventing it from going over 5mph , but just throwing that fact out in court by itself will never win a product liability case .
Usually there are lots of extra factors like industry standards and cost-benefit analyzes that are argued over by lots of expert witnesses .
Could Riyobi have " reasonably " adopted the improved design ?
etc. etc.The ONLY reason that a patent has anything important to do with this case is that patents are , by definition , publicly available and it makes an easy argument to show that Riyobi knew or could have known about what was disclosed in the patent .
Also , there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent .
Instead , the safety system is just an example of what is known , and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better .
The patent was likely just one data point of MANY data points used to establish what a " reasonable " safety system would look like .
One interesting point would be to see if Riyobi itself is the assignee of the patent....In a nutshell : Do n't read too much into this case .
Like most legal cases discussed on Slashdot , somebody saw a buzzword like " patent " and wanted to score points with the mouthbreathing site admins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot and the Law: Unsafe at any speed.It's been years since I was in Torts class, but this is a product liability suit... NOT a patent suit.
The only reason the "patent" is being bandied about is because this guy's argument boils down to this:  Riyobi knew (or should have known) that there was a safer way to make the saw.
Riyobi presumably did not choose the safer way.
Therefore, Riyobi should be liable for my injury.Note that this argument by itself is nowhere near sufficient to win a product liability lawsuit.
For example, it's easy to say that you could make any car safer by preventing it from going over 5mph, but just throwing that fact out in court by itself will never win a product liability case.
Usually there are lots of extra factors like industry standards and cost-benefit analyzes that are argued over by lots of expert witnesses.
Could Riyobi have "reasonably" adopted the improved design?
etc. etc.The ONLY reason that a patent has anything important to do with this case is that patents are, by definition, publicly available and it makes an easy argument to show that Riyobi knew or could have known about what was disclosed in the patent.
Also, there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent.
Instead, the safety system is just an example of what is known, and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better.
The patent was likely just one data point of MANY data points used to establish what a "reasonable" safety system would look like.
One interesting point would be to see if Riyobi itself is the assignee of the patent....In a nutshell: Don't read too much into this case.
Like most legal cases discussed on Slashdot, somebody saw a buzzword like "patent" and wanted to score points with the mouthbreathing site admins.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547550</id>
	<title>Re:Financially viable?</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1269023820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>SawStop's cheapest saw is $1600. To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $169 in parts. That alone is more than I paid for my table saw, brand new.</p></div><p>I bet those prices would come down, if instead of being manufactured only by a boutique shop with low volume, the tech was licensed and included in at least one product line of a major manufacturer of power tools.   Like, say, Riyobi...</p><p>As to the cost to put the saw back in working order, I have only one question in response:  How much does it cost to get a hand working again after severing a digit or two?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>SawStop 's cheapest saw is $ 1600 .
To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $ 169 in parts .
That alone is more than I paid for my table saw , brand new.I bet those prices would come down , if instead of being manufactured only by a boutique shop with low volume , the tech was licensed and included in at least one product line of a major manufacturer of power tools .
Like , say , Riyobi...As to the cost to put the saw back in working order , I have only one question in response : How much does it cost to get a hand working again after severing a digit or two ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SawStop's cheapest saw is $1600.
To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $169 in parts.
That alone is more than I paid for my table saw, brand new.I bet those prices would come down, if instead of being manufactured only by a boutique shop with low volume, the tech was licensed and included in at least one product line of a major manufacturer of power tools.
Like, say, Riyobi...As to the cost to put the saw back in working order, I have only one question in response:  How much does it cost to get a hand working again after severing a digit or two?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547876</id>
	<title>who is crazy here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269115440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crazy? Why? On the business end, a patent license costs money. So, if you break it down, these people had forgone safety for profit. I don't see why they should <b>not</b> be sued?</p><p>And it's not that horrible, TFA says the price would be about $150 on top - and we're talking about machines costing from 2000 to 5000 bucks here, so that's a few percent. For not losing your hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crazy ?
Why ? On the business end , a patent license costs money .
So , if you break it down , these people had forgone safety for profit .
I do n't see why they should not be sued ? And it 's not that horrible , TFA says the price would be about $ 150 on top - and we 're talking about machines costing from 2000 to 5000 bucks here , so that 's a few percent .
For not losing your hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crazy?
Why? On the business end, a patent license costs money.
So, if you break it down, these people had forgone safety for profit.
I don't see why they should not be sued?And it's not that horrible, TFA says the price would be about $150 on top - and we're talking about machines costing from 2000 to 5000 bucks here, so that's a few percent.
For not losing your hand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545084</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>kemapa</author>
	<datestamp>1268998980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's also important to note that trial courts don't <b>set</b> precedent, appellate courts do that (and this case was at the trial court level).  The other lawsuits that are popping up elsewhere aren't the result of any new precedent set by this case, they are the result of other lawyers being shown a winning argument.  CajunArson is right about Slashdot and the law -- I see a couple posts at +5 alleging that there is now legal precedent requiring the use of patented technology -- supposedly by a court that cannot even set precedent.</p><p>Furthermore, even if this case is reviewed at the appellate level and affirmed, it still will not set any legal precedent requiring companies to use patented technology.  The precedent already was/is a question of reasonableness.  As CajunArson mentioned, suggested use of a patented technology to improve safety is but one step down the road to establishing (or refuting) reasonableness in legal terms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also important to note that trial courts do n't set precedent , appellate courts do that ( and this case was at the trial court level ) .
The other lawsuits that are popping up elsewhere are n't the result of any new precedent set by this case , they are the result of other lawyers being shown a winning argument .
CajunArson is right about Slashdot and the law -- I see a couple posts at + 5 alleging that there is now legal precedent requiring the use of patented technology -- supposedly by a court that can not even set precedent.Furthermore , even if this case is reviewed at the appellate level and affirmed , it still will not set any legal precedent requiring companies to use patented technology .
The precedent already was/is a question of reasonableness .
As CajunArson mentioned , suggested use of a patented technology to improve safety is but one step down the road to establishing ( or refuting ) reasonableness in legal terms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also important to note that trial courts don't set precedent, appellate courts do that (and this case was at the trial court level).
The other lawsuits that are popping up elsewhere aren't the result of any new precedent set by this case, they are the result of other lawyers being shown a winning argument.
CajunArson is right about Slashdot and the law -- I see a couple posts at +5 alleging that there is now legal precedent requiring the use of patented technology -- supposedly by a court that cannot even set precedent.Furthermore, even if this case is reviewed at the appellate level and affirmed, it still will not set any legal precedent requiring companies to use patented technology.
The precedent already was/is a question of reasonableness.
As CajunArson mentioned, suggested use of a patented technology to improve safety is but one step down the road to establishing (or refuting) reasonableness in legal terms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547786</id>
	<title>Safety standards, but not fool-proof ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269027480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think such things need to be tested for safety standards by some external organization, who approves it.<br>And if some fool manages to cut his thumb of anyway, bad luck.</p><p>Actually I live in Germany and here stuff gets tested for safety and approved, but it doesn't need to be idiot-safe.<br>I've used table saws, chainsaws, angle grinders etc. as a teenager already, but my father told me to take care and have some respect and actually a spinning sharp blade causes respect by itself imho.<br>I think there should be safety standards that reduce the risks, but some tools are just more dangerous than others and dangerous tools shouldn't be operated by people, who are careless and lack the respect for it or have no clue.<br>People have some responsibility to care of themselves and know, what they are doing, before they do it. Such saws aren't toys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think such things need to be tested for safety standards by some external organization , who approves it.And if some fool manages to cut his thumb of anyway , bad luck.Actually I live in Germany and here stuff gets tested for safety and approved , but it does n't need to be idiot-safe.I 've used table saws , chainsaws , angle grinders etc .
as a teenager already , but my father told me to take care and have some respect and actually a spinning sharp blade causes respect by itself imho.I think there should be safety standards that reduce the risks , but some tools are just more dangerous than others and dangerous tools should n't be operated by people , who are careless and lack the respect for it or have no clue.People have some responsibility to care of themselves and know , what they are doing , before they do it .
Such saws are n't toys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think such things need to be tested for safety standards by some external organization, who approves it.And if some fool manages to cut his thumb of anyway, bad luck.Actually I live in Germany and here stuff gets tested for safety and approved, but it doesn't need to be idiot-safe.I've used table saws, chainsaws, angle grinders etc.
as a teenager already, but my father told me to take care and have some respect and actually a spinning sharp blade causes respect by itself imho.I think there should be safety standards that reduce the risks, but some tools are just more dangerous than others and dangerous tools shouldn't be operated by people, who are careless and lack the respect for it or have no clue.People have some responsibility to care of themselves and know, what they are doing, before they do it.
Such saws aren't toys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546328</id>
	<title>Was it advertised</title>
	<author>theJML</author>
	<datestamp>1269007620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was it advertised to contain the StopSaw tech? Because if not, he's just a dumb ass for not buying one that did and then sticking his hand in it. I mean seriously people the fact that this even went to court shows how screwed up our court system is. People need to take responsibility for their actions. If he wanted something with StopSaw, he should have bought something with StopSaw.</p><p>Now if it was supposed to have it and it didn't, then he has a lawsuit. If it didn't say that it did and he expected it to, then he needs to be charged for wasting our judicial system's time. Just because I buy a car and complain later that it doesn't have power seats doesn't mean I can sue someone for repetitive stress injuries related to moving the seat. It means I should have bought the damn power seat and got on with my life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was it advertised to contain the StopSaw tech ?
Because if not , he 's just a dumb ass for not buying one that did and then sticking his hand in it .
I mean seriously people the fact that this even went to court shows how screwed up our court system is .
People need to take responsibility for their actions .
If he wanted something with StopSaw , he should have bought something with StopSaw.Now if it was supposed to have it and it did n't , then he has a lawsuit .
If it did n't say that it did and he expected it to , then he needs to be charged for wasting our judicial system 's time .
Just because I buy a car and complain later that it does n't have power seats does n't mean I can sue someone for repetitive stress injuries related to moving the seat .
It means I should have bought the damn power seat and got on with my life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was it advertised to contain the StopSaw tech?
Because if not, he's just a dumb ass for not buying one that did and then sticking his hand in it.
I mean seriously people the fact that this even went to court shows how screwed up our court system is.
People need to take responsibility for their actions.
If he wanted something with StopSaw, he should have bought something with StopSaw.Now if it was supposed to have it and it didn't, then he has a lawsuit.
If it didn't say that it did and he expected it to, then he needs to be charged for wasting our judicial system's time.
Just because I buy a car and complain later that it doesn't have power seats doesn't mean I can sue someone for repetitive stress injuries related to moving the seat.
It means I should have bought the damn power seat and got on with my life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546102</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>serbanp</author>
	<datestamp>1269005640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help <b>prevent death or serious injury </b>in an automobile accident...</p></div><p>You're sure you're not confusing the airbag with a seatbelt? The seatbelt is a very good safety device and probably saved many, many lives.</p><p>The airbag, though, is arguably an expensive gadget that maimed and killed quite a few people. How does it prevent death or serious injury?</p><p>Especially in US, this low-yield bomb is quite dangerous if you happen to be a short driver or wear glasses. If I knew how to disable it in my car, I would do it; I don't like the prospect of getting blind just because the frigging airbag deployed from a mild bump...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident...You 're sure you 're not confusing the airbag with a seatbelt ?
The seatbelt is a very good safety device and probably saved many , many lives.The airbag , though , is arguably an expensive gadget that maimed and killed quite a few people .
How does it prevent death or serious injury ? Especially in US , this low-yield bomb is quite dangerous if you happen to be a short driver or wear glasses .
If I knew how to disable it in my car , I would do it ; I do n't like the prospect of getting blind just because the frigging airbag deployed from a mild bump.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident...You're sure you're not confusing the airbag with a seatbelt?
The seatbelt is a very good safety device and probably saved many, many lives.The airbag, though, is arguably an expensive gadget that maimed and killed quite a few people.
How does it prevent death or serious injury?Especially in US, this low-yield bomb is quite dangerous if you happen to be a short driver or wear glasses.
If I knew how to disable it in my car, I would do it; I don't like the prospect of getting blind just because the frigging airbag deployed from a mild bump...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544128</id>
	<title>This will be overturned</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1268994600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tools are dangerous, and if you buy a tool the risks are explained in the manual. You want 'safe' tools, shop around and pay more. OR choose average tools and keep your fingers out of the way like the rest of us do.  ( this assumes no fundamental defects of course )</p><p>This will get over turned on appeals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tools are dangerous , and if you buy a tool the risks are explained in the manual .
You want 'safe ' tools , shop around and pay more .
OR choose average tools and keep your fingers out of the way like the rest of us do .
( this assumes no fundamental defects of course ) This will get over turned on appeals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tools are dangerous, and if you buy a tool the risks are explained in the manual.
You want 'safe' tools, shop around and pay more.
OR choose average tools and keep your fingers out of the way like the rest of us do.
( this assumes no fundamental defects of course )This will get over turned on appeals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547570</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269024000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Butcher's mail, which is likely what was meant, is something else entirely. Tiny one piece loops, and it's exactly meant to prevent injury around powerful cutters. It probably would reduce severity of injuries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Butcher 's mail , which is likely what was meant , is something else entirely .
Tiny one piece loops , and it 's exactly meant to prevent injury around powerful cutters .
It probably would reduce severity of injuries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Butcher's mail, which is likely what was meant, is something else entirely.
Tiny one piece loops, and it's exactly meant to prevent injury around powerful cutters.
It probably would reduce severity of injuries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Posting=!Working</author>
	<datestamp>1268994480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As the tip of the blade hooks into the loop of the chain mail glove and tries to pull it, and your hand inside it, through the slot in the table and being partially successful, you'll wish you'd just cut your finger off.</p><p>Some tools are much safer without gloves. Drill Presses and vertical band saws are in this category.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As the tip of the blade hooks into the loop of the chain mail glove and tries to pull it , and your hand inside it , through the slot in the table and being partially successful , you 'll wish you 'd just cut your finger off.Some tools are much safer without gloves .
Drill Presses and vertical band saws are in this category .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the tip of the blade hooks into the loop of the chain mail glove and tries to pull it, and your hand inside it, through the slot in the table and being partially successful, you'll wish you'd just cut your finger off.Some tools are much safer without gloves.
Drill Presses and vertical band saws are in this category.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547700</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1269025860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.</p></div><p>They grow back?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard 's tail of the human body.They grow back ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.They grow back?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546574</id>
	<title>Re:The plan</title>
	<author>gnupun</author>
	<datestamp>1269010560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>3) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they weren't safety scissors<br>
4) Profit!</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

5) Try to create a new law forcing inventors to license their patents to competitors. <br>
It may be okay to regulate having "Stop Saw" patented tech in every single power saw sold henceforth, but changing the law to affect all patents is robbery in broad daylight.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>3 ) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they were n't safety scissors 4 ) Profit !
5 ) Try to create a new law forcing inventors to license their patents to competitors .
It may be okay to regulate having " Stop Saw " patented tech in every single power saw sold henceforth , but changing the law to affect all patents is robbery in broad daylight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they weren't safety scissors
4) Profit!
5) Try to create a new law forcing inventors to license their patents to competitors.
It may be okay to regulate having "Stop Saw" patented tech in every single power saw sold henceforth, but changing the law to affect all patents is robbery in broad daylight.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546284</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>caffiend2049</author>
	<datestamp>1269007140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oh yeah....but what about my +2 Elvish chain mail? I think that would totally help with my saving throw verses saws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh yeah....but what about my + 2 Elvish chain mail ?
I think that would totally help with my saving throw verses saws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh yeah....but what about my +2 Elvish chain mail?
I think that would totally help with my saving throw verses saws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546138</id>
	<title>Re:Not a "government" requirement</title>
	<author>BBTaeKwonDo</author>
	<datestamp>1269005940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A jury verdict is not a government order.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Um, what? As a result of this verdict, the government is forcing the company to a) pay damages or b) face contempt-of-court charges. If that's not a government order, I don't know what is.</p><blockquote><div><p>That doesn't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology. Certainly it doesn't mean they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Agreed, but the verdict substantially raises the liability risk for the manufacturer who chooses to not include the Saw-Stop technology. I'd be rather surprised if the license for this patent got cheaper, too.
</p><p>
Overall, I'm shocked by this verdict. Saws are designed to cut things - of course they can cut a finger/hand/arm/artery that gets in their way.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A jury verdict is not a government order .
Um , what ?
As a result of this verdict , the government is forcing the company to a ) pay damages or b ) face contempt-of-court charges .
If that 's not a government order , I do n't know what is.That does n't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology .
Certainly it does n't mean they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands .
Agreed , but the verdict substantially raises the liability risk for the manufacturer who chooses to not include the Saw-Stop technology .
I 'd be rather surprised if the license for this patent got cheaper , too .
Overall , I 'm shocked by this verdict .
Saws are designed to cut things - of course they can cut a finger/hand/arm/artery that gets in their way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A jury verdict is not a government order.
Um, what?
As a result of this verdict, the government is forcing the company to a) pay damages or b) face contempt-of-court charges.
If that's not a government order, I don't know what is.That doesn't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology.
Certainly it doesn't mean they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands.
Agreed, but the verdict substantially raises the liability risk for the manufacturer who chooses to not include the Saw-Stop technology.
I'd be rather surprised if the license for this patent got cheaper, too.
Overall, I'm shocked by this verdict.
Saws are designed to cut things - of course they can cut a finger/hand/arm/artery that gets in their way.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548448</id>
	<title>Video demo</title>
	<author>bluec</author>
	<datestamp>1269085680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For those interested in seeing this technology in action:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE</a> [youtube.com]

Includes a demo of a guy trying to feed his finger into the saw.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For those interested in seeing this technology in action : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = E3mzhvMgrLE [ youtube.com ] Includes a demo of a guy trying to feed his finger into the saw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those interested in seeing this technology in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE [youtube.com]

Includes a demo of a guy trying to feed his finger into the saw.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549098</id>
	<title>Marching Morons</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269095760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am appalled by this decision. He had a choice up front to spend a lot of money on 'saw stop' or a (much) cheaper saw. He chose the latter and then  sued. That the jury agreed with him is astounding considering that he rejected the 'saw stop' choice up front. The consequences of this kind of decision are too easy to envision. The tree of life is self-pruning. Pity it was only his finger that got cut off... Hopefully this will be appealed and sanity will crawl back on the scene.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am appalled by this decision .
He had a choice up front to spend a lot of money on 'saw stop ' or a ( much ) cheaper saw .
He chose the latter and then sued .
That the jury agreed with him is astounding considering that he rejected the 'saw stop ' choice up front .
The consequences of this kind of decision are too easy to envision .
The tree of life is self-pruning .
Pity it was only his finger that got cut off... Hopefully this will be appealed and sanity will crawl back on the scene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am appalled by this decision.
He had a choice up front to spend a lot of money on 'saw stop' or a (much) cheaper saw.
He chose the latter and then  sued.
That the jury agreed with him is astounding considering that he rejected the 'saw stop' choice up front.
The consequences of this kind of decision are too easy to envision.
The tree of life is self-pruning.
Pity it was only his finger that got cut off... Hopefully this will be appealed and sanity will crawl back on the scene.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544284</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>uncanny</author>
	<datestamp>1268995200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well it would be safer if they made the blade out of cloth and didn't include a power switch, or cord for that matter (trip hazard).  If you dont understand how dangerous a [insert powertool, gun, etc] is, then you really shouldn't have been using it int he first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>well it would be safer if they made the blade out of cloth and did n't include a power switch , or cord for that matter ( trip hazard ) .
If you dont understand how dangerous a [ insert powertool , gun , etc ] is , then you really should n't have been using it int he first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well it would be safer if they made the blade out of cloth and didn't include a power switch, or cord for that matter (trip hazard).
If you dont understand how dangerous a [insert powertool, gun, etc] is, then you really shouldn't have been using it int he first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544382</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>pdabbadabba</author>
	<datestamp>1268995680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you for writing this so I didn't have to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you for writing this so I did n't have to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you for writing this so I didn't have to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544294</id>
	<title>Safety begins between the ears</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I spend most of my weekends during the fairer months outside climbing.  You would not believe the stupid shit you see people doing with belay devices that attempt to make climbing safer by nature (Petzl GriGri, Trango Cinch, etc).  Last year I saw a guy belaying with a GriGri while laying in a hammock.  I don't think anybody using a tubular device (ATC, etc) would even consider this.  Attempting to make the system safer breeds complacency in some people.</p><p>I also heard about a bad ground fall that happened because somebody belaying with a GriGri grabbed the climber's end of the rope during a fall, preventing the GriGri from locking and arresting the fall.  In this case, attempting to make the system safer led to misuse, probably because of a fundamental lack of understanding of how it worked in the first place.</p><p>Another neat potential failure mode of auto-locking belay devices occurs when the belayer gets pulled up into the lowest point of protection (because of a long lead fall, which is not an inherently unsafe thing, nor is it uncommon.  I've fallen 25' (4.5 m) and that's a pretty short lead fall).  Some devices can be forced into an unlocked state if they jam up against a bolt hanger or.  If the belayer isn't paying attention and doesn't have a hand on the brake end of the rope, the climber falls.  I won't even try to count the number of times I've seen people using an auto-locking device without their hand on the brake end of the rope.</p><p>I honestly believe that adding safety features *CAN* make dangerous activities safer, but if and only if people treat the added safety feature as a backup to their own training and understanding of the activity in the first place.  I trust these devices in the hands of the people I climb with because I trust the people I climb with to act safely without the added safety features.  The takeaway lesson is that people need to be safe, not devices.</p><p>Also, I don't mean to pick on the GriGri, it's just the oldest and most common of the auto-locking belay devices on the market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I spend most of my weekends during the fairer months outside climbing .
You would not believe the stupid shit you see people doing with belay devices that attempt to make climbing safer by nature ( Petzl GriGri , Trango Cinch , etc ) .
Last year I saw a guy belaying with a GriGri while laying in a hammock .
I do n't think anybody using a tubular device ( ATC , etc ) would even consider this .
Attempting to make the system safer breeds complacency in some people.I also heard about a bad ground fall that happened because somebody belaying with a GriGri grabbed the climber 's end of the rope during a fall , preventing the GriGri from locking and arresting the fall .
In this case , attempting to make the system safer led to misuse , probably because of a fundamental lack of understanding of how it worked in the first place.Another neat potential failure mode of auto-locking belay devices occurs when the belayer gets pulled up into the lowest point of protection ( because of a long lead fall , which is not an inherently unsafe thing , nor is it uncommon .
I 've fallen 25 ' ( 4.5 m ) and that 's a pretty short lead fall ) .
Some devices can be forced into an unlocked state if they jam up against a bolt hanger or .
If the belayer is n't paying attention and does n't have a hand on the brake end of the rope , the climber falls .
I wo n't even try to count the number of times I 've seen people using an auto-locking device without their hand on the brake end of the rope.I honestly believe that adding safety features * CAN * make dangerous activities safer , but if and only if people treat the added safety feature as a backup to their own training and understanding of the activity in the first place .
I trust these devices in the hands of the people I climb with because I trust the people I climb with to act safely without the added safety features .
The takeaway lesson is that people need to be safe , not devices.Also , I do n't mean to pick on the GriGri , it 's just the oldest and most common of the auto-locking belay devices on the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I spend most of my weekends during the fairer months outside climbing.
You would not believe the stupid shit you see people doing with belay devices that attempt to make climbing safer by nature (Petzl GriGri, Trango Cinch, etc).
Last year I saw a guy belaying with a GriGri while laying in a hammock.
I don't think anybody using a tubular device (ATC, etc) would even consider this.
Attempting to make the system safer breeds complacency in some people.I also heard about a bad ground fall that happened because somebody belaying with a GriGri grabbed the climber's end of the rope during a fall, preventing the GriGri from locking and arresting the fall.
In this case, attempting to make the system safer led to misuse, probably because of a fundamental lack of understanding of how it worked in the first place.Another neat potential failure mode of auto-locking belay devices occurs when the belayer gets pulled up into the lowest point of protection (because of a long lead fall, which is not an inherently unsafe thing, nor is it uncommon.
I've fallen 25' (4.5 m) and that's a pretty short lead fall).
Some devices can be forced into an unlocked state if they jam up against a bolt hanger or.
If the belayer isn't paying attention and doesn't have a hand on the brake end of the rope, the climber falls.
I won't even try to count the number of times I've seen people using an auto-locking device without their hand on the brake end of the rope.I honestly believe that adding safety features *CAN* make dangerous activities safer, but if and only if people treat the added safety feature as a backup to their own training and understanding of the activity in the first place.
I trust these devices in the hands of the people I climb with because I trust the people I climb with to act safely without the added safety features.
The takeaway lesson is that people need to be safe, not devices.Also, I don't mean to pick on the GriGri, it's just the oldest and most common of the auto-locking belay devices on the market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546982</id>
	<title>You know...</title>
	<author>Superdarion</author>
	<datestamp>1269014760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would just LOVE to see the government remove the patent and make the technology free for all.<br> <br>

At least it'd be consistent with the jury's ruling!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would just LOVE to see the government remove the patent and make the technology free for all .
At least it 'd be consistent with the jury 's ruling !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would just LOVE to see the government remove the patent and make the technology free for all.
At least it'd be consistent with the jury's ruling!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545964</id>
	<title>I watched my son almost cut his hand offf</title>
	<author>cdn-programmer</author>
	<datestamp>1269004500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was with a skill saw.  I got the saw for $25 bux.  I was screaming at the top of my lungs for him to stop!</p><p>A safety device like this will come down in price and frankly its worth the price!</p><p>Besides he was asking for something like 8\% according to the article.</p><p>Maybe the next new invention will be a computer eye that watches the operators hands.  How about something can can detect metal going into the blade?  There are lots of ways more safety can be built into equipment.</p><p>Furthermore in the situation that went to trial apparently the guy was in a professional shop and lost the use of his hand.</p><p>So with a skill saw for instance... would it be possible to put a depth sensor on it so if the blade extends more than say 1/8" past the wood that it won't work?  One would need an over-ride I suppose but I've seem more than a few contractors set the blade at maximum depth and this is just asking for an accident.</p><p>But then I did have a friend chop the end off his thumb and why?  There was no wood in the saw.  He was done.  He forgot the blade was still on and reached over for the board!  He only took 1/2 the nail off.  It took over a year to heal.  And why did the accident happen?  Because he took the guard off and chucked it - that is why.</p><p>I think the answer is a manufacturer can only accomplish so much but they should still do what they can.  In this case it looks like they are hiding behind legal arguments motivated by money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was with a skill saw .
I got the saw for $ 25 bux .
I was screaming at the top of my lungs for him to stop ! A safety device like this will come down in price and frankly its worth the price ! Besides he was asking for something like 8 \ % according to the article.Maybe the next new invention will be a computer eye that watches the operators hands .
How about something can can detect metal going into the blade ?
There are lots of ways more safety can be built into equipment.Furthermore in the situation that went to trial apparently the guy was in a professional shop and lost the use of his hand.So with a skill saw for instance... would it be possible to put a depth sensor on it so if the blade extends more than say 1/8 " past the wood that it wo n't work ?
One would need an over-ride I suppose but I 've seem more than a few contractors set the blade at maximum depth and this is just asking for an accident.But then I did have a friend chop the end off his thumb and why ?
There was no wood in the saw .
He was done .
He forgot the blade was still on and reached over for the board !
He only took 1/2 the nail off .
It took over a year to heal .
And why did the accident happen ?
Because he took the guard off and chucked it - that is why.I think the answer is a manufacturer can only accomplish so much but they should still do what they can .
In this case it looks like they are hiding behind legal arguments motivated by money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was with a skill saw.
I got the saw for $25 bux.
I was screaming at the top of my lungs for him to stop!A safety device like this will come down in price and frankly its worth the price!Besides he was asking for something like 8\% according to the article.Maybe the next new invention will be a computer eye that watches the operators hands.
How about something can can detect metal going into the blade?
There are lots of ways more safety can be built into equipment.Furthermore in the situation that went to trial apparently the guy was in a professional shop and lost the use of his hand.So with a skill saw for instance... would it be possible to put a depth sensor on it so if the blade extends more than say 1/8" past the wood that it won't work?
One would need an over-ride I suppose but I've seem more than a few contractors set the blade at maximum depth and this is just asking for an accident.But then I did have a friend chop the end off his thumb and why?
There was no wood in the saw.
He was done.
He forgot the blade was still on and reached over for the board!
He only took 1/2 the nail off.
It took over a year to heal.
And why did the accident happen?
Because he took the guard off and chucked it - that is why.I think the answer is a manufacturer can only accomplish so much but they should still do what they can.
In this case it looks like they are hiding behind legal arguments motivated by money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544248</id>
	<title>Geez!</title>
	<author>OhHellWithIt</author>
	<datestamp>1268995020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a power saw, for crying out loud! It's <em>supposed</em> to be able to do that! (Or how else will I get rid of the bodies?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a power saw , for crying out loud !
It 's supposed to be able to do that !
( Or how else will I get rid of the bodies ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a power saw, for crying out loud!
It's supposed to be able to do that!
(Or how else will I get rid of the bodies?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860</id>
	<title>But wait!</title>
	<author>lottameez</author>
	<datestamp>1268993520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Requiring manufacturers to use this patented safety device would be denying me my right to cut off my fingers.  Stay out of my self-mutilation, government!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Requiring manufacturers to use this patented safety device would be denying me my right to cut off my fingers .
Stay out of my self-mutilation , government !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Requiring manufacturers to use this patented safety device would be denying me my right to cut off my fingers.
Stay out of my self-mutilation, government!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544392</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent. Instead, the safety system is just an example of what is known, and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better.</p> </div><p>I believe there is NO REQUIREMENT either for any safety measure like that, the costumer bought a law abiding product from a law abiding company in full knowledge of his actions, the company therefore cannot be guilty of its costumer stupidity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent .
Instead , the safety system is just an example of what is known , and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better .
I believe there is NO REQUIREMENT either for any safety measure like that , the costumer bought a law abiding product from a law abiding company in full knowledge of his actions , the company therefore can not be guilty of its costumer stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, there is NO REQUIREMENT that Riyobi would HAVE to use the safety system described in the patent.
Instead, the safety system is just an example of what is known, and Riyobi could argue that its own systems were just as good or even better.
I believe there is NO REQUIREMENT either for any safety measure like that, the costumer bought a law abiding product from a law abiding company in full knowledge of his actions, the company therefore cannot be guilty of its costumer stupidity.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544588</id>
	<title>Obligatory car analogy</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1268996580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I crash a rear-wheel-drive car while cornering in the rain can I sue the manufacturer for not giving it all-wheel-drive?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I crash a rear-wheel-drive car while cornering in the rain can I sue the manufacturer for not giving it all-wheel-drive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I crash a rear-wheel-drive car while cornering in the rain can I sue the manufacturer for not giving it all-wheel-drive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574</id>
	<title>Re:Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>AMuse</author>
	<datestamp>1268996460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the well documented problems is that if you cut wood that is "too wet" then the brake will activate, thinking that it's hit flesh.</p><p>So really the article should say  "Each time you cut wood that's too damp (which you have no way to determine beforehand) you pay $169 to replace the blade and brake".  That puts into focus why some woodworkers who know how to be careful do not WANT the safety feature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the well documented problems is that if you cut wood that is " too wet " then the brake will activate , thinking that it 's hit flesh.So really the article should say " Each time you cut wood that 's too damp ( which you have no way to determine beforehand ) you pay $ 169 to replace the blade and brake " .
That puts into focus why some woodworkers who know how to be careful do not WANT the safety feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the well documented problems is that if you cut wood that is "too wet" then the brake will activate, thinking that it's hit flesh.So really the article should say  "Each time you cut wood that's too damp (which you have no way to determine beforehand) you pay $169 to replace the blade and brake".
That puts into focus why some woodworkers who know how to be careful do not WANT the safety feature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547226</id>
	<title>zombies agree with verdict</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269018180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they also want to eat your brain</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they also want to eat your brain</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they also want to eat your brain</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544158</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do not wear gloves when working with power saws, because the glove is more likely to drag you through the saw than the act of losing a bit of flesh.</p><p>Want to be safe? Keep your damn digits out of the saw line and practice decent workspace hygiene.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do not wear gloves when working with power saws , because the glove is more likely to drag you through the saw than the act of losing a bit of flesh.Want to be safe ?
Keep your damn digits out of the saw line and practice decent workspace hygiene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do not wear gloves when working with power saws, because the glove is more likely to drag you through the saw than the act of losing a bit of flesh.Want to be safe?
Keep your damn digits out of the saw line and practice decent workspace hygiene.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544334</id>
	<title>No it shouldn't</title>
	<author>Radical Moderate</author>
	<datestamp>1268995440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The StopSaw tech is not a "standard safety device".  It is only used by StopSaw.  Airbags in cars sold in the US are mandated by federal law.  There's no law mandating StopSaw.  Whether there should be such a mandate is open to debate, but should not be decided by 12 randomly picked jurors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The StopSaw tech is not a " standard safety device " .
It is only used by StopSaw .
Airbags in cars sold in the US are mandated by federal law .
There 's no law mandating StopSaw .
Whether there should be such a mandate is open to debate , but should not be decided by 12 randomly picked jurors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The StopSaw tech is not a "standard safety device".
It is only used by StopSaw.
Airbags in cars sold in the US are mandated by federal law.
There's no law mandating StopSaw.
Whether there should be such a mandate is open to debate, but should not be decided by 12 randomly picked jurors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546842</id>
	<title>How about...</title>
	<author>brillow</author>
	<datestamp>1269013200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about not using a table saw if you don't know how to not stick your thumb in the blade?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about not using a table saw if you do n't know how to not stick your thumb in the blade ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about not using a table saw if you don't know how to not stick your thumb in the blade?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544674</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268996940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeeed. The point is that a company can be held liable for not making a safe saw. This really isn't anything new.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeeed .
The point is that a company can be held liable for not making a safe saw .
This really is n't anything new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeeed.
The point is that a company can be held liable for not making a safe saw.
This really isn't anything new.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544078</id>
	<title>Re:Not "the government"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In this case, the "requirement" is not coming from the government, but from a jury...</p></div> </blockquote><p>Last I looked, the courts were a branch of government.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case , the " requirement " is not coming from the government , but from a jury... Last I looked , the courts were a branch of government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this case, the "requirement" is not coming from the government, but from a jury... Last I looked, the courts were a branch of government.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543918</id>
	<title>the "lawsuit awards"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there used to be a link on the darwin awards website to another site, honoring this kind of law suits.</p><p>there was one particular award given to a family who lost their child due to a lawnmower accident at school(?).<br>the family first sued the school. after realisin that a school can't be cash-milked, they sued the lawnmower company.<br>the suit was won, because the company had not in cluded some safety feature in that particular model, even though the feature was introduced \_after\_ the model was built!!!</p><p>can someone find the site? (iirc the award is named after the woman who sued McDonalds because the coffee was too hot)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there used to be a link on the darwin awards website to another site , honoring this kind of law suits.there was one particular award given to a family who lost their child due to a lawnmower accident at school ( ?
) .the family first sued the school .
after realisin that a school ca n't be cash-milked , they sued the lawnmower company.the suit was won , because the company had not in cluded some safety feature in that particular model , even though the feature was introduced \ _after \ _ the model was built ! !
! can someone find the site ?
( iirc the award is named after the woman who sued McDonalds because the coffee was too hot )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there used to be a link on the darwin awards website to another site, honoring this kind of law suits.there was one particular award given to a family who lost their child due to a lawnmower accident at school(?
).the family first sued the school.
after realisin that a school can't be cash-milked, they sued the lawnmower company.the suit was won, because the company had not in cluded some safety feature in that particular model, even though the feature was introduced \_after\_ the model was built!!
!can someone find the site?
(iirc the award is named after the woman who sued McDonalds because the coffee was too hot)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544004</id>
	<title>Idiots</title>
	<author>Hamsterdan</author>
	<datestamp>1268994060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow... Humanity never ceases to amaze me. They lost because the guy is a moron? It's a freaking-power tool. If you don't know how to use it safely you have no business being around one.<br><br>I hope the company appeals and wins that time. I don't want my product's prices going up because people are too stupid to use them properly.<br><br>Seen on a hairdryer *Do not use while sleeping or in the bathtub* .<br>*Contents might be hot* on coffee cups. Because of such morons.<br><br>While we're at it, why not put a warning on every ice cream tub<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,Slushie and popsicle?<br><br>*Warning might cause brain freeze if eaten too fast*<br><br>Or *Eating junk food will make you fat* on McDonald's menus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow... Humanity never ceases to amaze me .
They lost because the guy is a moron ?
It 's a freaking-power tool .
If you do n't know how to use it safely you have no business being around one.I hope the company appeals and wins that time .
I do n't want my product 's prices going up because people are too stupid to use them properly.Seen on a hairdryer * Do not use while sleeping or in the bathtub * .
* Contents might be hot * on coffee cups .
Because of such morons.While we 're at it , why not put a warning on every ice cream tub ,Slushie and popsicle ?
* Warning might cause brain freeze if eaten too fast * Or * Eating junk food will make you fat * on McDonald 's menus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow... Humanity never ceases to amaze me.
They lost because the guy is a moron?
It's a freaking-power tool.
If you don't know how to use it safely you have no business being around one.I hope the company appeals and wins that time.
I don't want my product's prices going up because people are too stupid to use them properly.Seen on a hairdryer *Do not use while sleeping or in the bathtub* .
*Contents might be hot* on coffee cups.
Because of such morons.While we're at it, why not put a warning on every ice cream tub ,Slushie and popsicle?
*Warning might cause brain freeze if eaten too fast*Or *Eating junk food will make you fat* on McDonald's menus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543904</id>
	<title>Turn it around: was he using all poss. safety?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Was the guy using all possible safety devices available, including those that cost a lot? If not, then by his logic he's responsible (which can't be, because he's clearly irresponsible). Or, did he verify that the saw used all possible safety mechanisms before he used it? Hell, what if I patent the "has no power cord or battery" safety mechanism; does that mean anyone can sue a power too manufacturer for not incorporating my 100\% safe device?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was the guy using all possible safety devices available , including those that cost a lot ?
If not , then by his logic he 's responsible ( which ca n't be , because he 's clearly irresponsible ) .
Or , did he verify that the saw used all possible safety mechanisms before he used it ?
Hell , what if I patent the " has no power cord or battery " safety mechanism ; does that mean anyone can sue a power too manufacturer for not incorporating my 100 \ % safe device ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was the guy using all possible safety devices available, including those that cost a lot?
If not, then by his logic he's responsible (which can't be, because he's clearly irresponsible).
Or, did he verify that the saw used all possible safety mechanisms before he used it?
Hell, what if I patent the "has no power cord or battery" safety mechanism; does that mean anyone can sue a power too manufacturer for not incorporating my 100\% safe device?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544602</id>
	<title>cha-ching</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1268996640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The owner of the "Saw Stop" patent will shortly be announcing that they will be license it to anyone for the low low royalties of $43,127 per saw.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The owner of the " Saw Stop " patent will shortly be announcing that they will be license it to anyone for the low low royalties of $ 43,127 per saw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The owner of the "Saw Stop" patent will shortly be announcing that they will be license it to anyone for the low low royalties of $43,127 per saw.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547008</id>
	<title>No, its not crazy</title>
	<author>drolli</author>
	<datestamp>1269015000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would they have implemented an onw technology preventing this injury - ok. Would they have written in the manual that "this saw does not contain state-of-the-art  protections against injury, use on you own risk" -ok. Would they have used a patented scheme to protect against injury - ok.</p><p>when it comes to injuries i think machines and tools must avoid well-known risks, and that is the task of the designer of the machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would they have implemented an onw technology preventing this injury - ok. Would they have written in the manual that " this saw does not contain state-of-the-art protections against injury , use on you own risk " -ok. Would they have used a patented scheme to protect against injury - ok.when it comes to injuries i think machines and tools must avoid well-known risks , and that is the task of the designer of the machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would they have implemented an onw technology preventing this injury - ok. Would they have written in the manual that "this saw does not contain state-of-the-art  protections against injury, use on you own risk" -ok. Would they have used a patented scheme to protect against injury - ok.when it comes to injuries i think machines and tools must avoid well-known risks, and that is the task of the designer of the machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544084</id>
	<title>Our legal system sucks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lawyers are the scourge of the earth, and will not be finished mining the product liability goldmine until everything in existence has giant safety warnings on it, and commonsense is abandoned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lawyers are the scourge of the earth , and will not be finished mining the product liability goldmine until everything in existence has giant safety warnings on it , and commonsense is abandoned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lawyers are the scourge of the earth, and will not be finished mining the product liability goldmine until everything in existence has giant safety warnings on it, and commonsense is abandoned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545300</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269000060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dunno, but they'd sure be liable if they didn't mean certain safety thresholds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dunno , but they 'd sure be liable if they did n't mean certain safety thresholds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dunno, but they'd sure be liable if they didn't mean certain safety thresholds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546798</id>
	<title>You know...</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1269012900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think all of these asinine patents should be enforced. Go for the reductio ad absurdum approach.</p><p>Then, everyone will be buying Chinese tools on the black market, and the US economy will collapse even further.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think all of these asinine patents should be enforced .
Go for the reductio ad absurdum approach.Then , everyone will be buying Chinese tools on the black market , and the US economy will collapse even further .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think all of these asinine patents should be enforced.
Go for the reductio ad absurdum approach.Then, everyone will be buying Chinese tools on the black market, and the US economy will collapse even further.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544364</id>
	<title>ummm....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>shouldn't he be liable for sticking his hand into the blade of a running saw?</p><p>not sticking his hand in the blade would have prevented injury.  Perhaps chainmail gloves would have prevented injury. etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>should n't he be liable for sticking his hand into the blade of a running saw ? not sticking his hand in the blade would have prevented injury .
Perhaps chainmail gloves would have prevented injury .
etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shouldn't he be liable for sticking his hand into the blade of a running saw?not sticking his hand in the blade would have prevented injury.
Perhaps chainmail gloves would have prevented injury.
etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544350</id>
	<title>Re:But wait!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah and that's not even the worst part. Did you know the Government is chlorinating and more importantly FLOURIDATING our WATER SUPPLY? You know when fluoridation first began? Nineteen forty-six. How does that coincide with your post-war Liberal conspiracy, huh? Its incredibly obvious isn't it. A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Liberal works.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah and that 's not even the worst part .
Did you know the Government is chlorinating and more importantly FLOURIDATING our WATER SUPPLY ?
You know when fluoridation first began ?
Nineteen forty-six .
How does that coincide with your post-war Liberal conspiracy , huh ?
Its incredibly obvious is n't it .
A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual .
Certainly without any choice .
That 's the way your hard-core Liberal works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah and that's not even the worst part.
Did you know the Government is chlorinating and more importantly FLOURIDATING our WATER SUPPLY?
You know when fluoridation first began?
Nineteen forty-six.
How does that coincide with your post-war Liberal conspiracy, huh?
Its incredibly obvious isn't it.
A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual.
Certainly without any choice.
That's the way your hard-core Liberal works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547108</id>
	<title>Re:sue everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269016380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How to get modded up:</p><p>Using "Americans" in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are. "Americans must always sue everyone..."? I mean seriously if that's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for "insightful" around here...</p><p>Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them.</p><p>Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops.</p><p>Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie.</p><p>etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How to get modded up : Using " Americans " in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are .
" Americans must always sue everyone... " ?
I mean seriously if that 's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for " insightful " around here...Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them.Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops.Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie.etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How to get modded up:Using "Americans" in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are.
"Americans must always sue everyone..."?
I mean seriously if that's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for "insightful" around here...Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them.Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops.Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie.etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544944</id>
	<title>How did he do it.</title>
	<author>sskinnider</author>
	<datestamp>1268998380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All table saws come with safety devices.  They are mandated by law.  Every table saw MUST come with a saw guard and an anti kickback device.  The saw guard alone should have either kept his hands away from the blade, or give him an indication that his hands are too close to the blade.  If he would have read the instruction booklet, it would have given him plenty of safety info.
I did not see anything in TFA that indicated if the safety devices were removed, a move that most woodworkers require every once in a while, but apparently he is the only person who was not aware that w razor sharp blade spinning at high RPM is dangerous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All table saws come with safety devices .
They are mandated by law .
Every table saw MUST come with a saw guard and an anti kickback device .
The saw guard alone should have either kept his hands away from the blade , or give him an indication that his hands are too close to the blade .
If he would have read the instruction booklet , it would have given him plenty of safety info .
I did not see anything in TFA that indicated if the safety devices were removed , a move that most woodworkers require every once in a while , but apparently he is the only person who was not aware that w razor sharp blade spinning at high RPM is dangerous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All table saws come with safety devices.
They are mandated by law.
Every table saw MUST come with a saw guard and an anti kickback device.
The saw guard alone should have either kept his hands away from the blade, or give him an indication that his hands are too close to the blade.
If he would have read the instruction booklet, it would have given him plenty of safety info.
I did not see anything in TFA that indicated if the safety devices were removed, a move that most woodworkers require every once in a while, but apparently he is the only person who was not aware that w razor sharp blade spinning at high RPM is dangerous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842</id>
	<title>Not "the government"</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1268993460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology"</p></div></blockquote><p>In this case, the "requirement" is not coming from the government, but from a jury... The lawsuit was not brought by a government agency, but by a private individual...

</p><p>Nice to see an opposition to <em>government-required purchases</em>, though... Health insurance, anyone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology " In this case , the " requirement " is not coming from the government , but from a jury... The lawsuit was not brought by a government agency , but by a private individual.. . Nice to see an opposition to government-required purchases , though... Health insurance , anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology"In this case, the "requirement" is not coming from the government, but from a jury... The lawsuit was not brought by a government agency, but by a private individual...

Nice to see an opposition to government-required purchases, though... Health insurance, anyone?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545618</id>
	<title>What great spin!</title>
	<author>frank\_adrian314159</author>
	<datestamp>1269002400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology, it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place.</i> </p><p>The government is saying nothing about requiring this technology.  The populace (in the form of a jury) is saying that, if you have a reasonable way to reduce injuries and you willfully do not use it, we're probably going to give people who sue you a buttload of money.  Think of it as democracy in action!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology , it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place .
The government is saying nothing about requiring this technology .
The populace ( in the form of a jury ) is saying that , if you have a reasonable way to reduce injuries and you willfully do not use it , we 're probably going to give people who sue you a buttload of money .
Think of it as democracy in action !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the government is going to require companies to use a patented technology, it seems that the only reasonable solution is to remove the patent on it and allow competition in the market place.
The government is saying nothing about requiring this technology.
The populace (in the form of a jury) is saying that, if you have a reasonable way to reduce injuries and you willfully do not use it, we're probably going to give people who sue you a buttload of money.
Think of it as democracy in action!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547012</id>
	<title>Electro-dynamic braking</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269015060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides IT I do some carpentry, etc.  A very few of my tools have electro-dynamic braking.  When you shut them off they stop FAST- no long coast down.</p><p>There are several ways to implement this, but basically you apply DC to an AC motor and it will stop quickly.  Or apply DC to the field of a brush motor and short the armature (brush) contacts- it will stop fast, or apply a short to the armature (brushes) of a PM motor- it will stop fast.  It's not rocket-science or patented technology and SHOULD be REQUIRED on ALL power tools.  I should do some HW hacks on mine- I stupidly cut a finger slightly last week on a power-planer coasting down- I was in a hurry and my mind went to the next task rather than thinking about the still coasting blades.  So easy to fix...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides IT I do some carpentry , etc .
A very few of my tools have electro-dynamic braking .
When you shut them off they stop FAST- no long coast down.There are several ways to implement this , but basically you apply DC to an AC motor and it will stop quickly .
Or apply DC to the field of a brush motor and short the armature ( brush ) contacts- it will stop fast , or apply a short to the armature ( brushes ) of a PM motor- it will stop fast .
It 's not rocket-science or patented technology and SHOULD be REQUIRED on ALL power tools .
I should do some HW hacks on mine- I stupidly cut a finger slightly last week on a power-planer coasting down- I was in a hurry and my mind went to the next task rather than thinking about the still coasting blades .
So easy to fix.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides IT I do some carpentry, etc.
A very few of my tools have electro-dynamic braking.
When you shut them off they stop FAST- no long coast down.There are several ways to implement this, but basically you apply DC to an AC motor and it will stop quickly.
Or apply DC to the field of a brush motor and short the armature (brush) contacts- it will stop fast, or apply a short to the armature (brushes) of a PM motor- it will stop fast.
It's not rocket-science or patented technology and SHOULD be REQUIRED on ALL power tools.
I should do some HW hacks on mine- I stupidly cut a finger slightly last week on a power-planer coasting down- I was in a hurry and my mind went to the next task rather than thinking about the still coasting blades.
So easy to fix...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</id>
	<title>Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use. Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.</p><p>A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use .
Not because they 're particularly dangerous themselves , but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use.
Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544022</id>
	<title>law demands patented technology all the time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are sick and there is medical consensus that Blobbitol (a patented drug) can cure you, and your doctor gives you some other treatment and you die, he is probably liable for malpractice, wrongful death, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are sick and there is medical consensus that Blobbitol ( a patented drug ) can cure you , and your doctor gives you some other treatment and you die , he is probably liable for malpractice , wrongful death , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are sick and there is medical consensus that Blobbitol (a patented drug) can cure you, and your doctor gives you some other treatment and you die, he is probably liable for malpractice, wrongful death, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544302</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents. They sold a product without standard safety features. It has nothing to do with a patent.</p></div><p>Right.  If a manufacturer screwed up its assembly line to the point where somehow a car was made without airbags then they'd be liable as hell.  If a consumer bought a cheap car that didn't have air bags--back when before airbags were universal and specifically required by motor vehicle safety standards, but cars with airbags were available (for more $)--he should rightly be laughed at for trying to sue the company that made the cheaper car, because he <i>chose</i> the cheaper car.  That's basically what this lawsuit was: Sawstop is expensive and new (and still covered by patents) and it's not a 'universal' safety feature by any means.  There are no legal safety standards (or even industry-produced ones afaik) that require or even recommend Sawstop technology for all table saws, and yet the jury somehow mistakenly decided that it should be universal.  I probably wouldn't pay much extra for Sawstop; using a table saw is always dangerous, and the slight reduction in danger doesn't justify the substantial price increase.  But I definitely don't think it should effectively be legally required on all table saws sold in the U.S.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If a car company manufactures an automobile , and there is a production error , and the airbags are n't installed , they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents .
They sold a product without standard safety features .
It has nothing to do with a patent.Right .
If a manufacturer screwed up its assembly line to the point where somehow a car was made without airbags then they 'd be liable as hell .
If a consumer bought a cheap car that did n't have air bags--back when before airbags were universal and specifically required by motor vehicle safety standards , but cars with airbags were available ( for more $ ) --he should rightly be laughed at for trying to sue the company that made the cheaper car , because he chose the cheaper car .
That 's basically what this lawsuit was : Sawstop is expensive and new ( and still covered by patents ) and it 's not a 'universal ' safety feature by any means .
There are no legal safety standards ( or even industry-produced ones afaik ) that require or even recommend Sawstop technology for all table saws , and yet the jury somehow mistakenly decided that it should be universal .
I probably would n't pay much extra for Sawstop ; using a table saw is always dangerous , and the slight reduction in danger does n't justify the substantial price increase .
But I definitely do n't think it should effectively be legally required on all table saws sold in the U.S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents.
They sold a product without standard safety features.
It has nothing to do with a patent.Right.
If a manufacturer screwed up its assembly line to the point where somehow a car was made without airbags then they'd be liable as hell.
If a consumer bought a cheap car that didn't have air bags--back when before airbags were universal and specifically required by motor vehicle safety standards, but cars with airbags were available (for more $)--he should rightly be laughed at for trying to sue the company that made the cheaper car, because he chose the cheaper car.
That's basically what this lawsuit was: Sawstop is expensive and new (and still covered by patents) and it's not a 'universal' safety feature by any means.
There are no legal safety standards (or even industry-produced ones afaik) that require or even recommend Sawstop technology for all table saws, and yet the jury somehow mistakenly decided that it should be universal.
I probably wouldn't pay much extra for Sawstop; using a table saw is always dangerous, and the slight reduction in danger doesn't justify the substantial price increase.
But I definitely don't think it should effectively be legally required on all table saws sold in the U.S.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544818</id>
	<title>This saw bit me</title>
	<author>frog\_strat</author>
	<datestamp>1268997600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It cut to the bone on my left index and middle finger.  Doctor sowed it all up and they work but are partially numb.

I left the blood on the wall as a reminder to be more careful.  If these suits catch on, home woodworking is in trouble.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It cut to the bone on my left index and middle finger .
Doctor sowed it all up and they work but are partially numb .
I left the blood on the wall as a reminder to be more careful .
If these suits catch on , home woodworking is in trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It cut to the bone on my left index and middle finger.
Doctor sowed it all up and they work but are partially numb.
I left the blood on the wall as a reminder to be more careful.
If these suits catch on, home woodworking is in trouble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31585138</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1269364980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent +1 Ewwwwwww</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent + 1 Ewwwwwww</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent +1 Ewwwwwww</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549650</id>
	<title>Re:sue everyone</title>
	<author>krazytekn0</author>
	<datestamp>1269101940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How to get modded up:

Using "Americans" in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are. "Americans must always sue everyone..."? I mean seriously if that's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for "insightful" around here...
<br>
Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them.
<br>
Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops.
<br>
Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie.
<br>
etc...</htmltext>
<tokenext>How to get modded up : Using " Americans " in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are .
" Americans must always sue everyone... " ?
I mean seriously if that 's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for " insightful " around here.. . Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them .
Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops .
Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie .
etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How to get modded up:

Using "Americans" in a way that suggests you are not one and much smarter than all who are.
"Americans must always sue everyone..."?
I mean seriously if that's the kind of horrid generalization that passes for "insightful" around here...

Seems like Europeans must always start world wars and wait until us stupid Americans come and fix it for them.
Seems like Asians must always force everyone to work in sweat shops.
Seems like Australians must always talk about putting shrimp on the barbie.
etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544746</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Artagel</author>
	<datestamp>1268997300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Air bags go back a long way. The initial patents begin with the number "3" from the 60s or early 70s. There are many air bags that are not patented. For example, the floating horn design of Mercedes-Benz (air bag system has horn actuator underneath so that pressing the center of the steering column operates the horn) is off patent. The Mercedes-Benz patent was largely the reason why for years horns were activated by buttons on the steering column spokes or the like. Flexible air bag covers with film switches embedded that encased the air bag and its deployment explosive that had the horn closer to the surface were produced in thermoset plastics by Morton and later into thermoplastics by Morton and Venture Industries. GM preferred designs that had harder thermoplastic inner layers covered by softer thermoset outer layers initially. Then the Mercedez-Benz patent expired and the floating horn design regained some popularity. The reason people worked around Mercedez-Benz was because Mercedez-Benz wanted royalties. By no means did someone have a meaningful monopoly over air bags for any length of time when they were in wide use.

So the message is: come up with your own safety solution. If someone else did it, you can too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Air bags go back a long way .
The initial patents begin with the number " 3 " from the 60s or early 70s .
There are many air bags that are not patented .
For example , the floating horn design of Mercedes-Benz ( air bag system has horn actuator underneath so that pressing the center of the steering column operates the horn ) is off patent .
The Mercedes-Benz patent was largely the reason why for years horns were activated by buttons on the steering column spokes or the like .
Flexible air bag covers with film switches embedded that encased the air bag and its deployment explosive that had the horn closer to the surface were produced in thermoset plastics by Morton and later into thermoplastics by Morton and Venture Industries .
GM preferred designs that had harder thermoplastic inner layers covered by softer thermoset outer layers initially .
Then the Mercedez-Benz patent expired and the floating horn design regained some popularity .
The reason people worked around Mercedez-Benz was because Mercedez-Benz wanted royalties .
By no means did someone have a meaningful monopoly over air bags for any length of time when they were in wide use .
So the message is : come up with your own safety solution .
If someone else did it , you can too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Air bags go back a long way.
The initial patents begin with the number "3" from the 60s or early 70s.
There are many air bags that are not patented.
For example, the floating horn design of Mercedes-Benz (air bag system has horn actuator underneath so that pressing the center of the steering column operates the horn) is off patent.
The Mercedes-Benz patent was largely the reason why for years horns were activated by buttons on the steering column spokes or the like.
Flexible air bag covers with film switches embedded that encased the air bag and its deployment explosive that had the horn closer to the surface were produced in thermoset plastics by Morton and later into thermoplastics by Morton and Venture Industries.
GM preferred designs that had harder thermoplastic inner layers covered by softer thermoset outer layers initially.
Then the Mercedez-Benz patent expired and the floating horn design regained some popularity.
The reason people worked around Mercedez-Benz was because Mercedez-Benz wanted royalties.
By no means did someone have a meaningful monopoly over air bags for any length of time when they were in wide use.
So the message is: come up with your own safety solution.
If someone else did it, you can too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544828</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>circusboy</author>
	<datestamp>1268997660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one wonders whether the injury rate is indicative of the inherent dangers of a tablesaw as much as it is indicative of the nature of the types of people who buy sawstop saws...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one wonders whether the injury rate is indicative of the inherent dangers of a tablesaw as much as it is indicative of the nature of the types of people who buy sawstop saws.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one wonders whether the injury rate is indicative of the inherent dangers of a tablesaw as much as it is indicative of the nature of the types of people who buy sawstop saws...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544562</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>ChefInnocent</author>
	<datestamp>1268996460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I question the 700 number too, but if you consider that someone may loose up to 5 fingers on one hand, and that the Saw Stop is used in schools (for which the $1500 is small compared to a single law suit), the number starts to make a bit more sense.<br> <br>
The issue I have, is once again society proves it was founded on a stupidity clause.  Some members of our species are too dumb to live, but society steps in to save people from themselves.  <i>Almost</i> anyone who has ever looked a table saw, miter saw, band saw, etc. understands these are tools that deserve respect and can cause serious injury.  The book that came with my purchase of a miter saw had more pages of warnings than instructions; I'd have to pull it out, but I bet it told me I could cut fingers off if I weren't careful.  Every time <i>I</i> use one, I make absolutely sure I know where all my digits are in relation to the blade.<br> <br>
Ultimately, it would be nice if Ryobi implemented this safety feature in their saws, but I don't expect them to save me from myself in every case.  I'd have paid 8\% more for my saw to have the feature, but I still would want to be extra careful around power tools.  I don't consider it Ryobi's fault if I'm using my miter saw with a dangling neck tie and something happens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I question the 700 number too , but if you consider that someone may loose up to 5 fingers on one hand , and that the Saw Stop is used in schools ( for which the $ 1500 is small compared to a single law suit ) , the number starts to make a bit more sense .
The issue I have , is once again society proves it was founded on a stupidity clause .
Some members of our species are too dumb to live , but society steps in to save people from themselves .
Almost anyone who has ever looked a table saw , miter saw , band saw , etc .
understands these are tools that deserve respect and can cause serious injury .
The book that came with my purchase of a miter saw had more pages of warnings than instructions ; I 'd have to pull it out , but I bet it told me I could cut fingers off if I were n't careful .
Every time I use one , I make absolutely sure I know where all my digits are in relation to the blade .
Ultimately , it would be nice if Ryobi implemented this safety feature in their saws , but I do n't expect them to save me from myself in every case .
I 'd have paid 8 \ % more for my saw to have the feature , but I still would want to be extra careful around power tools .
I do n't consider it Ryobi 's fault if I 'm using my miter saw with a dangling neck tie and something happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I question the 700 number too, but if you consider that someone may loose up to 5 fingers on one hand, and that the Saw Stop is used in schools (for which the $1500 is small compared to a single law suit), the number starts to make a bit more sense.
The issue I have, is once again society proves it was founded on a stupidity clause.
Some members of our species are too dumb to live, but society steps in to save people from themselves.
Almost anyone who has ever looked a table saw, miter saw, band saw, etc.
understands these are tools that deserve respect and can cause serious injury.
The book that came with my purchase of a miter saw had more pages of warnings than instructions; I'd have to pull it out, but I bet it told me I could cut fingers off if I weren't careful.
Every time I use one, I make absolutely sure I know where all my digits are in relation to the blade.
Ultimately, it would be nice if Ryobi implemented this safety feature in their saws, but I don't expect them to save me from myself in every case.
I'd have paid 8\% more for my saw to have the feature, but I still would want to be extra careful around power tools.
I don't consider it Ryobi's fault if I'm using my miter saw with a dangling neck tie and something happens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884</id>
	<title>We've seen this before, move along..</title>
	<author>katz</author>
	<datestamp>1268993640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this any different from Congress requiring car manufacturers to incorporate electronic stability control in their new cars?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this any different from Congress requiring car manufacturers to incorporate electronic stability control in their new cars ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this any different from Congress requiring car manufacturers to incorporate electronic stability control in their new cars?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544412</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Chosen Reject</author>
	<datestamp>1268995860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The liability should not be on Ryobi any more than it should be on the guy filing the lawsuit.  Ryobi could have paid for the licensing rights, or the guy could have bought a Saw Stop instead of a Ryobi.  The only possible way for Ryobi to have any kind of liability in this is if they claimed to have the functionality of a Saw Stop saw, but did not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The liability should not be on Ryobi any more than it should be on the guy filing the lawsuit .
Ryobi could have paid for the licensing rights , or the guy could have bought a Saw Stop instead of a Ryobi .
The only possible way for Ryobi to have any kind of liability in this is if they claimed to have the functionality of a Saw Stop saw , but did not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The liability should not be on Ryobi any more than it should be on the guy filing the lawsuit.
Ryobi could have paid for the licensing rights, or the guy could have bought a Saw Stop instead of a Ryobi.
The only possible way for Ryobi to have any kind of liability in this is if they claimed to have the functionality of a Saw Stop saw, but did not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543804</id>
	<title>he should think this through</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By his own logic, seems he should also be liable for not buying a saw using the "Saw Stop" technology.  I hope the jury sees that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By his own logic , seems he should also be liable for not buying a saw using the " Saw Stop " technology .
I hope the jury sees that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By his own logic, seems he should also be liable for not buying a saw using the "Saw Stop" technology.
I hope the jury sees that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544234</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>Wyatt Earp</author>
	<datestamp>1268994960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How the hell would a FOSS apply to this?</p><p>SawStop is a electro-mechanical device, and a brilliant fix too, this is an example of a patent that works and an inventor that should be able to make some money off the design for a period of time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell would a FOSS apply to this ? SawStop is a electro-mechanical device , and a brilliant fix too , this is an example of a patent that works and an inventor that should be able to make some money off the design for a period of time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell would a FOSS apply to this?SawStop is a electro-mechanical device, and a brilliant fix too, this is an example of a patent that works and an inventor that should be able to make some money off the design for a period of time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548362</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Kagetsuki</author>
	<datestamp>1269083760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if you loose a pinkie you can always make yourself look like a bad ass by saying you "defaulted on a Yakuza loan".</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you loose a pinkie you can always make yourself look like a bad ass by saying you " defaulted on a Yakuza loan " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you loose a pinkie you can always make yourself look like a bad ass by saying you "defaulted on a Yakuza loan".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545680</id>
	<title>Re:sue everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269002760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well you can sue the company for not including flesh detecting safety technology in the knife you purchased. Now think about the number of blades you need to replace everytime you want to cut meat...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well you can sue the company for not including flesh detecting safety technology in the knife you purchased .
Now think about the number of blades you need to replace everytime you want to cut meat.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well you can sue the company for not including flesh detecting safety technology in the knife you purchased.
Now think about the number of blades you need to replace everytime you want to cut meat...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544422</id>
	<title>I've got a better lawsuit that WILL pay MORE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone not living in Cheney's spider-hole has seen the<br>automobile ads with drivers executing absolutely dangerous maneuvers in vehicles.</p><p>These ads promote l the virtues of dangerous driving and I want compensation for the all the psychotic drivers I encounter in my drive to and from work.</p><p>I guarantee BILLIONS of U.S. $ in this lawsuit.</p><p>Yours In New York,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone not living in Cheney 's spider-hole has seen theautomobile ads with drivers executing absolutely dangerous maneuvers in vehicles.These ads promote l the virtues of dangerous driving and I want compensation for the all the psychotic drivers I encounter in my drive to and from work.I guarantee BILLIONS of U.S. $ in this lawsuit.Yours In New York,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone not living in Cheney's spider-hole has seen theautomobile ads with drivers executing absolutely dangerous maneuvers in vehicles.These ads promote l the virtues of dangerous driving and I want compensation for the all the psychotic drivers I encounter in my drive to and from work.I guarantee BILLIONS of U.S. $ in this lawsuit.Yours In New York,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549614</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>McD</author>
	<datestamp>1269101640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly, you're not an emacs user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly , you 're not an emacs user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly, you're not an emacs user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894</id>
	<title>Not a "government" requirement</title>
	<author>Tiger4</author>
	<datestamp>1268993640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A jury verdict is not a government order.  The jury, for whatever reason, found that the plaintiff had a good argument and they agreed with him.  That doesn't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology. Certainly it doesn't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands.  It only means the plaintiff had a good lawyer, Ryobi had a not so good one, and the jury decided Ryobi could have made a safer product.  The rest is just outrageous hyperbole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A jury verdict is not a government order .
The jury , for whatever reason , found that the plaintiff had a good argument and they agreed with him .
That does n't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology .
Certainly it does n't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands .
It only means the plaintiff had a good lawyer , Ryobi had a not so good one , and the jury decided Ryobi could have made a safer product .
The rest is just outrageous hyperbole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A jury verdict is not a government order.
The jury, for whatever reason, found that the plaintiff had a good argument and they agreed with him.
That doesn't immediately mean every saw manufacturer must now and forever include this patented technology.
Certainly it doesn't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands.
It only means the plaintiff had a good lawyer, Ryobi had a not so good one, and the jury decided Ryobi could have made a safer product.
The rest is just outrageous hyperbole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>guyfawkes-11-5</author>
	<datestamp>1268994720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use. Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.</p><p>A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.</p></div><p>I cant say that I have ever seen anyone use a chainmail glove with a tablesaw, hobbyist or professional.  A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail.  Ef. There are special blades you can use when cutting lumber with nails in it. It doesn't even flinch when cutting an 8d nail.

So its back to basics:

<br>Pushsticks to keep your fingers away, featherboards to reduce kickback,common sense and RESPECT for the machine!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use .
Not because they 're particularly dangerous themselves , but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.I cant say that I have ever seen anyone use a chainmail glove with a tablesaw , hobbyist or professional .
A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail .
Ef. There are special blades you can use when cutting lumber with nails in it .
It does n't even flinch when cutting an 8d nail .
So its back to basics : Pushsticks to keep your fingers away , featherboards to reduce kickback,common sense and RESPECT for the machine !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are one of the most dangerous tools you can use.
Not because they're particularly dangerous themselves, but because people like to cut their thumbs off when they use them.A chainmail glove reduces the chance of this.I cant say that I have ever seen anyone use a chainmail glove with a tablesaw, hobbyist or professional.
A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail.
Ef. There are special blades you can use when cutting lumber with nails in it.
It doesn't even flinch when cutting an 8d nail.
So its back to basics:

Pushsticks to keep your fingers away, featherboards to reduce kickback,common sense and RESPECT for the machine!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547280</id>
	<title>Table saws first.. whats next, routers</title>
	<author>bleh-of-the-huns</author>
	<datestamp>1269019020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, woodworking uses inherently dangerous equipment.  Can you imagine whats next, lets sue X name router company because that sharp ass bit spinning at 18k rpm, removes all your flesh.. guess what, there is no saw stop tech for routers, or planers, or thickness planers.. and those all can do way more damage then a table saw.....</p><p>Where does it stop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , woodworking uses inherently dangerous equipment .
Can you imagine whats next , lets sue X name router company because that sharp ass bit spinning at 18k rpm , removes all your flesh.. guess what , there is no saw stop tech for routers , or planers , or thickness planers.. and those all can do way more damage then a table saw.....Where does it stop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, woodworking uses inherently dangerous equipment.
Can you imagine whats next, lets sue X name router company because that sharp ass bit spinning at 18k rpm, removes all your flesh.. guess what, there is no saw stop tech for routers, or planers, or thickness planers.. and those all can do way more damage then a table saw.....Where does it stop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544268</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>jemenake</author>
	<datestamp>1268995140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm conflicted about this. As a woodworker, I've known about the SawStop for about 5 years and have been following its development and deployment into the marketplace. From a woodworker's perspective, this device is revolutionary... at total game-changer in the area of safety, so I could see why some people would consider this to be either mandatory equipment or that it would be negligence on the part of the manufacturer if they left this component off.
<br> <br>
However, like the summary said, it's chilling that a patented piece of tech would be made de-facto mandatory due to the fact that, if you leave it off of your product, you get sued. I guess it depends upon how much the patent-holder was asking for their license. All I ever heard was that talks had fallen through with all of the manufacturers, so SawStop had to start making their own saws. If SawStop was asking for some huge license fee, then... yeah... they're being unreasonable. However, if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount (and I'd consider anything under $50 per saw to be "reasonable"), then I'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm conflicted about this .
As a woodworker , I 've known about the SawStop for about 5 years and have been following its development and deployment into the marketplace .
From a woodworker 's perspective , this device is revolutionary... at total game-changer in the area of safety , so I could see why some people would consider this to be either mandatory equipment or that it would be negligence on the part of the manufacturer if they left this component off .
However , like the summary said , it 's chilling that a patented piece of tech would be made de-facto mandatory due to the fact that , if you leave it off of your product , you get sued .
I guess it depends upon how much the patent-holder was asking for their license .
All I ever heard was that talks had fallen through with all of the manufacturers , so SawStop had to start making their own saws .
If SawStop was asking for some huge license fee , then... yeah... they 're being unreasonable .
However , if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount ( and I 'd consider anything under $ 50 per saw to be " reasonable " ) , then I 'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm conflicted about this.
As a woodworker, I've known about the SawStop for about 5 years and have been following its development and deployment into the marketplace.
From a woodworker's perspective, this device is revolutionary... at total game-changer in the area of safety, so I could see why some people would consider this to be either mandatory equipment or that it would be negligence on the part of the manufacturer if they left this component off.
However, like the summary said, it's chilling that a patented piece of tech would be made de-facto mandatory due to the fact that, if you leave it off of your product, you get sued.
I guess it depends upon how much the patent-holder was asking for their license.
All I ever heard was that talks had fallen through with all of the manufacturers, so SawStop had to start making their own saws.
If SawStop was asking for some huge license fee, then... yeah... they're being unreasonable.
However, if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount (and I'd consider anything under $50 per saw to be "reasonable"), then I'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546060</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269005220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is <i>one</i> known safer way to make a saw.  Riyobi cannot make a saw that way, without licensing it.  So their options are,</p><p>1) pay whatever is asked by the Saw Stop guy for his patent,</p><p>2) perform the R&amp;D necessary to come up with a <i>different</i> way to make a saw safer.</p><p>Note that plenty of companies have undoubtedly been working on 2 on an ongoing basis, and no one has come up with anything else like the Saw Stop.</p><p>So... what if the Saw Stop guy was unwilling to license his patent at any cost?  Such would be perfectly legal.  Should he suddenly have a monopoly on saws (an old technology), simply because he has a new technology that makes them a bit safer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is one known safer way to make a saw .
Riyobi can not make a saw that way , without licensing it .
So their options are,1 ) pay whatever is asked by the Saw Stop guy for his patent,2 ) perform the R&amp;D necessary to come up with a different way to make a saw safer.Note that plenty of companies have undoubtedly been working on 2 on an ongoing basis , and no one has come up with anything else like the Saw Stop.So... what if the Saw Stop guy was unwilling to license his patent at any cost ?
Such would be perfectly legal .
Should he suddenly have a monopoly on saws ( an old technology ) , simply because he has a new technology that makes them a bit safer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is one known safer way to make a saw.
Riyobi cannot make a saw that way, without licensing it.
So their options are,1) pay whatever is asked by the Saw Stop guy for his patent,2) perform the R&amp;D necessary to come up with a different way to make a saw safer.Note that plenty of companies have undoubtedly been working on 2 on an ongoing basis, and no one has come up with anything else like the Saw Stop.So... what if the Saw Stop guy was unwilling to license his patent at any cost?
Such would be perfectly legal.
Should he suddenly have a monopoly on saws (an old technology), simply because he has a new technology that makes them a bit safer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544708</id>
	<title>Re:We've seen this before, move along..</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268997120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had better be able to turn that shit off. I want the car to what I say, there are situations where I really do know better. Note the fact that I do not buy cars with slushboxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had better be able to turn that shit off .
I want the car to what I say , there are situations where I really do know better .
Note the fact that I do not buy cars with slushboxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had better be able to turn that shit off.
I want the car to what I say, there are situations where I really do know better.
Note the fact that I do not buy cars with slushboxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544368</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Unless there was an actual mechanical failure of the saw, this man got cut because he was misusing the saw.  If you are using a table saw correctly there is no risk of loosing a finger at all.</p><p>Certainly people do loose fingers all the time while using table saws but thats mostly becaue they either dont know how to use them or they use them all the time and they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass because they use the tool all the time, eventually you get distracted or unlucky.</p><p>I have little doubt that he was using the tool in a way that is specifically warned against in the documentation.  There is no reason for your finger to get within a foot of the blade on one of these things if your using it properly with a guide and a jig.</p><p>All that said, I misuse tools all the time, one day I might be this guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    Unless there was an actual mechanical failure of the saw , this man got cut because he was misusing the saw .
If you are using a table saw correctly there is no risk of loosing a finger at all.Certainly people do loose fingers all the time while using table saws but thats mostly becaue they either dont know how to use them or they use them all the time and they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass because they use the tool all the time , eventually you get distracted or unlucky.I have little doubt that he was using the tool in a way that is specifically warned against in the documentation .
There is no reason for your finger to get within a foot of the blade on one of these things if your using it properly with a guide and a jig.All that said , I misuse tools all the time , one day I might be this guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    Unless there was an actual mechanical failure of the saw, this man got cut because he was misusing the saw.
If you are using a table saw correctly there is no risk of loosing a finger at all.Certainly people do loose fingers all the time while using table saws but thats mostly becaue they either dont know how to use them or they use them all the time and they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass because they use the tool all the time, eventually you get distracted or unlucky.I have little doubt that he was using the tool in a way that is specifically warned against in the documentation.
There is no reason for your finger to get within a foot of the blade on one of these things if your using it properly with a guide and a jig.All that said, I misuse tools all the time, one day I might be this guy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547552</id>
	<title>Re:FTFA...</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1269023820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered, you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'd like to see some statistics on SawStop being falsely triggered (wet/green wood) versus not.</p><p>Also, how about the same sensing technology that just applies a brake, rather than destroying the blade and block?  It would do slightly more damage, but it would be a scratch/gash rather than a missing finger...  Is their patent the only possible way to detect flesh nearing/touching a saw blade?</p><p>Yes, the lawsuit is stupid, yes he shouldn't have prevailed, but it is sad when companies try to deny reality, and write-off all progress for contrived reasons...  Certainly, better safety could be provided.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered , you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade.I 'd like to see some statistics on SawStop being falsely triggered ( wet/green wood ) versus not.Also , how about the same sensing technology that just applies a brake , rather than destroying the blade and block ?
It would do slightly more damage , but it would be a scratch/gash rather than a missing finger... Is their patent the only possible way to detect flesh nearing/touching a saw blade ? Yes , the lawsuit is stupid , yes he should n't have prevailed , but it is sad when companies try to deny reality , and write-off all progress for contrived reasons... Certainly , better safety could be provided .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered, you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade.I'd like to see some statistics on SawStop being falsely triggered (wet/green wood) versus not.Also, how about the same sensing technology that just applies a brake, rather than destroying the blade and block?
It would do slightly more damage, but it would be a scratch/gash rather than a missing finger...  Is their patent the only possible way to detect flesh nearing/touching a saw blade?Yes, the lawsuit is stupid, yes he shouldn't have prevailed, but it is sad when companies try to deny reality, and write-off all progress for contrived reasons...  Certainly, better safety could be provided.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982</id>
	<title>Re:Not "the government"</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1268994000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The jury held that <i>the law</i> required the company to do so. The law requiring something is pretty much the definition of something being required by "the government".</p><p>(And in any case, a jury is a government institution, albeit a temporarily constituted one.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The jury held that the law required the company to do so .
The law requiring something is pretty much the definition of something being required by " the government " .
( And in any case , a jury is a government institution , albeit a temporarily constituted one .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The jury held that the law required the company to do so.
The law requiring something is pretty much the definition of something being required by "the government".
(And in any case, a jury is a government institution, albeit a temporarily constituted one.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544014</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>black3d</author>
	<datestamp>1268994120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only on Slashdot could a post suggesting to use "free open source software" on a sawing table be marked "insightful".</p><p>Hopefully OP was joking.. but then.. people are replying to it seriously.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:\</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only on Slashdot could a post suggesting to use " free open source software " on a sawing table be marked " insightful " .Hopefully OP was joking.. but then.. people are replying to it seriously .
: \</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only on Slashdot could a post suggesting to use "free open source software" on a sawing table be marked "insightful".Hopefully OP was joking.. but then.. people are replying to it seriously.
:\</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544070</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>RTFA.  This is not a "standard" safety device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFA .
This is not a " standard " safety device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFA.
This is not a "standard" safety device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547562</id>
	<title>Re:Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269023940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a "test" mode where you can touch the material to the blade to see if it would trigger the safety feature.  You can also disable the safety (with a key) if you plan on cutting wet wood or metal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a " test " mode where you can touch the material to the blade to see if it would trigger the safety feature .
You can also disable the safety ( with a key ) if you plan on cutting wet wood or metal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a "test" mode where you can touch the material to the blade to see if it would trigger the safety feature.
You can also disable the safety (with a key) if you plan on cutting wet wood or metal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547608</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269024480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Butcher's mail is made up of extremely fine loops, and is used around heavy machinery by repairmen and butchers, and generally reduces severity of injury. The loops in it are small enough that they're unlikely to be caught by the tip of the saw. A fold of the material on the other hand... Question becomes is the damage dealt by the glove getting caught worse than the damage for sweeping your hand through the saw.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Butcher 's mail is made up of extremely fine loops , and is used around heavy machinery by repairmen and butchers , and generally reduces severity of injury .
The loops in it are small enough that they 're unlikely to be caught by the tip of the saw .
A fold of the material on the other hand... Question becomes is the damage dealt by the glove getting caught worse than the damage for sweeping your hand through the saw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Butcher's mail is made up of extremely fine loops, and is used around heavy machinery by repairmen and butchers, and generally reduces severity of injury.
The loops in it are small enough that they're unlikely to be caught by the tip of the saw.
A fold of the material on the other hand... Question becomes is the damage dealt by the glove getting caught worse than the damage for sweeping your hand through the saw.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544714</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268997120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a lathe</p></div><p>Link?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a latheLink ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a latheLink?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544012</id>
	<title>The plan</title>
	<author>ajlitt</author>
	<datestamp>1268994060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) Buy sharp scissors<br>2) Run with scissors<br>3) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they weren't safety scissors<br>4) Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Buy sharp scissors2 ) Run with scissors3 ) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they were n't safety scissors4 ) Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Buy sharp scissors2) Run with scissors3) Sue manufacturer on the grounds that they weren't safety scissors4) Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544478</id>
	<title>not the same as airbags</title>
	<author>circusboy</author>
	<datestamp>1268996100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for the sake of argument, many people have raised the fact that there were lawsuits regarding cars with and without airbags.  the major difference between laws about cars and those about powertools, is that cars are used in groups, there are other people on the road who may need to be protected from your negligent driving.  since you could be injured by another's car, as well as yourself, there is some area where the legislated (or court mandated,) safety equipment may be necessary. when govenrnments pass laws, (when done properly) they are intended to govern or limit interactions between citizens.</p><p>however, outlawing tablesaws without sawstop tech because some idiot thought they knew how to use a table saw is legislating to protect you from yourself.  and like many other current morality laws, is equally stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for the sake of argument , many people have raised the fact that there were lawsuits regarding cars with and without airbags .
the major difference between laws about cars and those about powertools , is that cars are used in groups , there are other people on the road who may need to be protected from your negligent driving .
since you could be injured by another 's car , as well as yourself , there is some area where the legislated ( or court mandated , ) safety equipment may be necessary .
when govenrnments pass laws , ( when done properly ) they are intended to govern or limit interactions between citizens.however , outlawing tablesaws without sawstop tech because some idiot thought they knew how to use a table saw is legislating to protect you from yourself .
and like many other current morality laws , is equally stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for the sake of argument, many people have raised the fact that there were lawsuits regarding cars with and without airbags.
the major difference between laws about cars and those about powertools, is that cars are used in groups, there are other people on the road who may need to be protected from your negligent driving.
since you could be injured by another's car, as well as yourself, there is some area where the legislated (or court mandated,) safety equipment may be necessary.
when govenrnments pass laws, (when done properly) they are intended to govern or limit interactions between citizens.however, outlawing tablesaws without sawstop tech because some idiot thought they knew how to use a table saw is legislating to protect you from yourself.
and like many other current morality laws, is equally stupid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545866</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269003780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can you KNOW that he bought the Ryobi over a SawStop?<br>He may have found out about the SawStop after mangling his hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can you KNOW that he bought the Ryobi over a SawStop ? He may have found out about the SawStop after mangling his hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can you KNOW that he bought the Ryobi over a SawStop?He may have found out about the SawStop after mangling his hands.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544318</id>
	<title>Re:Not "the government"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no law that requires the guy in the condo above you to avoid overfilling his tub.</p><p>But if he forgets and leaves the water on, and it seeps through the floor and ruins your condo, you will sue him. He neglected to use due care, and his negligence resulted in damage to your property. Civil lawsuits are about redress.</p><p>This company failed to deploy modern safety equipment, and were sued civilly for that design shortcoming. No different that if the saws were of shoddy construction and occasionally threw a blade and injured the user. The designs of the saws were substandard in the eyes of their peers -- the jury.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no law that requires the guy in the condo above you to avoid overfilling his tub.But if he forgets and leaves the water on , and it seeps through the floor and ruins your condo , you will sue him .
He neglected to use due care , and his negligence resulted in damage to your property .
Civil lawsuits are about redress.This company failed to deploy modern safety equipment , and were sued civilly for that design shortcoming .
No different that if the saws were of shoddy construction and occasionally threw a blade and injured the user .
The designs of the saws were substandard in the eyes of their peers -- the jury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no law that requires the guy in the condo above you to avoid overfilling his tub.But if he forgets and leaves the water on, and it seeps through the floor and ruins your condo, you will sue him.
He neglected to use due care, and his negligence resulted in damage to your property.
Civil lawsuits are about redress.This company failed to deploy modern safety equipment, and were sued civilly for that design shortcoming.
No different that if the saws were of shoddy construction and occasionally threw a blade and injured the user.
The designs of the saws were substandard in the eyes of their peers -- the jury.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544862</id>
	<title>all the facts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268997900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, once upon a time I saw a demonstration of the technology and heard the presentation of the company behind this story.  The company that licenses this technology makes it available at a very cheap price IIRC.  It can be adapted to a cheap ($400) table saw and does not require $169 in parts to restart the saw.  They demonstate the feature using a hot dog weenie...and I believe they turned the saw on again in the presentation I saw.  The jury is quite capabile of taking the mfg cost into account when making this award.  It is not clear that the jury was over-zealous.  You need to see the same numbers the jury (and the mfg) saw.</p><p>I agree with the poster above who said someone wanted to make an argument when they read the word "patent".  There are more facts to this story than the posters imply.  Read the original article as a first step, and take particular notice of the part about the $200 saw.  SawStop does not want to be in the business of building saws.  They couldn't compete with Black and Decker, Ryobi, etc.  But there is nothing wrong with licensing their technology.  These mfgs are just waiting for the patent to expire and deserve what they are getting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , once upon a time I saw a demonstration of the technology and heard the presentation of the company behind this story .
The company that licenses this technology makes it available at a very cheap price IIRC .
It can be adapted to a cheap ( $ 400 ) table saw and does not require $ 169 in parts to restart the saw .
They demonstate the feature using a hot dog weenie...and I believe they turned the saw on again in the presentation I saw .
The jury is quite capabile of taking the mfg cost into account when making this award .
It is not clear that the jury was over-zealous .
You need to see the same numbers the jury ( and the mfg ) saw.I agree with the poster above who said someone wanted to make an argument when they read the word " patent " .
There are more facts to this story than the posters imply .
Read the original article as a first step , and take particular notice of the part about the $ 200 saw .
SawStop does not want to be in the business of building saws .
They could n't compete with Black and Decker , Ryobi , etc .
But there is nothing wrong with licensing their technology .
These mfgs are just waiting for the patent to expire and deserve what they are getting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, once upon a time I saw a demonstration of the technology and heard the presentation of the company behind this story.
The company that licenses this technology makes it available at a very cheap price IIRC.
It can be adapted to a cheap ($400) table saw and does not require $169 in parts to restart the saw.
They demonstate the feature using a hot dog weenie...and I believe they turned the saw on again in the presentation I saw.
The jury is quite capabile of taking the mfg cost into account when making this award.
It is not clear that the jury was over-zealous.
You need to see the same numbers the jury (and the mfg) saw.I agree with the poster above who said someone wanted to make an argument when they read the word "patent".
There are more facts to this story than the posters imply.
Read the original article as a first step, and take particular notice of the part about the $200 saw.
SawStop does not want to be in the business of building saws.
They couldn't compete with Black and Decker, Ryobi, etc.
But there is nothing wrong with licensing their technology.
These mfgs are just waiting for the patent to expire and deserve what they are getting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545604</id>
	<title>This means that the SawStop guys...</title>
	<author>sbeckstead</author>
	<datestamp>1269002280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This means that the SawStop guys are going to be very wealthy.  If you want to avoid product liability you need to license this technology.  Now it's going to get expensive.  It was cheap the first time they were offered it but they decided that "Safety doesn't sell".  And they got sued before the patent ran out.  Boo hoo.  I guess safety will sell now!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This means that the SawStop guys are going to be very wealthy .
If you want to avoid product liability you need to license this technology .
Now it 's going to get expensive .
It was cheap the first time they were offered it but they decided that " Safety does n't sell " .
And they got sued before the patent ran out .
Boo hoo .
I guess safety will sell now !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means that the SawStop guys are going to be very wealthy.
If you want to avoid product liability you need to license this technology.
Now it's going to get expensive.
It was cheap the first time they were offered it but they decided that "Safety doesn't sell".
And they got sued before the patent ran out.
Boo hoo.
I guess safety will sell now!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544216</id>
	<title>Why not a IQ test?</title>
	<author>snspdaarf</author>
	<datestamp>1268994900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I took wood shop in school, our table saw had a guard over the blade, and we were taught to use push sticks so that our fingers did not get near the blade. I see people all the time doing dumb stunts with power tools. RTFM, dude, that's why Ryobi put one in with the saw. <br>
<br>
I have a feeling the reason why Ryobi didn't put the flesh detector  stuff on their saw is because the flesh has to come in contact with the saw to activate it. They probably figured they would get hit harder if they had new safety tech on their saw and it failed one time, because, hey, it was claimed the saw would stop if touched by flesh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I took wood shop in school , our table saw had a guard over the blade , and we were taught to use push sticks so that our fingers did not get near the blade .
I see people all the time doing dumb stunts with power tools .
RTFM , dude , that 's why Ryobi put one in with the saw .
I have a feeling the reason why Ryobi did n't put the flesh detector stuff on their saw is because the flesh has to come in contact with the saw to activate it .
They probably figured they would get hit harder if they had new safety tech on their saw and it failed one time , because , hey , it was claimed the saw would stop if touched by flesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I took wood shop in school, our table saw had a guard over the blade, and we were taught to use push sticks so that our fingers did not get near the blade.
I see people all the time doing dumb stunts with power tools.
RTFM, dude, that's why Ryobi put one in with the saw.
I have a feeling the reason why Ryobi didn't put the flesh detector  stuff on their saw is because the flesh has to come in contact with the saw to activate it.
They probably figured they would get hit harder if they had new safety tech on their saw and it failed one time, because, hey, it was claimed the saw would stop if touched by flesh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545662</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>SamAdam3d</author>
	<datestamp>1269002640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They make leather gloves for those tools. No fibers means no pulling. At my last job they had big signs all over the drill press: "NO KEVLAR."<br>
I can only imagine the pain of getting a Kevlar glove stuck in a drill press bit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They make leather gloves for those tools .
No fibers means no pulling .
At my last job they had big signs all over the drill press : " NO KEVLAR .
" I can only imagine the pain of getting a Kevlar glove stuck in a drill press bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They make leather gloves for those tools.
No fibers means no pulling.
At my last job they had big signs all over the drill press: "NO KEVLAR.
"
I can only imagine the pain of getting a Kevlar glove stuck in a drill press bit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</id>
	<title>Company sued for not using standard safety devices</title>
	<author>VinylRecords</author>
	<datestamp>1268993760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...that should be the title. Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident. The airbag is patented.</p><p><a href="http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/" title="patents.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/</a> [patents.com]</p><p>If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents. They sold a product without standard safety features. It has nothing to do with a patent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...that should be the title .
Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident .
The airbag is patented.http : //www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/ [ patents.com ] If a car company manufactures an automobile , and there is a production error , and the airbags are n't installed , they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents .
They sold a product without standard safety features .
It has nothing to do with a patent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that should be the title.
Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident.
The airbag is patented.http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/ [patents.com]If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents.
They sold a product without standard safety features.
It has nothing to do with a patent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>lupis42</author>
	<datestamp>1268995260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But this guy knowingly purchased a Ryobi, rather than a unit with SawStop, which was probably more expensive.</p><p>Are all car manufacturers that don't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems now liable when drivers rear end someone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But this guy knowingly purchased a Ryobi , rather than a unit with SawStop , which was probably more expensive.Are all car manufacturers that do n't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems now liable when drivers rear end someone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this guy knowingly purchased a Ryobi, rather than a unit with SawStop, which was probably more expensive.Are all car manufacturers that don't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems now liable when drivers rear end someone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886</id>
	<title>FTFA...</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1268998080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Last week, a Boston jury<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p><p>That's all I needed to read to understand.  While East Texas juries are reknown for their patent infringement jurisprudence, Boston juries never met a victim they didn't love, no matter the circumstances.  And they never met a corporation they didn't think deserved to pay out a little cash.  No surprise at all here.</p><p>The secondary problem is that saw manufacturers are well aware of SawStop technology, but refuse to give it any credence. They both ignore and discreidt it for three reasons:</p><p>1) To admit it is effective is to make it desireable for their products, and implicitly state that their products are less safe than they might otherwise be.</p><p>2) To actually incorporate it in their products wuld increase prices, possibly to the point that sales could decline.  A little.</p><p>3) SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered, you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade.  Yes, please stop the flames, I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB.  But it will annoy people who have to pay out $100-$200 or more very time they trip it.  And many will claim it 'just triggered' and demand refunds and free parts.  Witness the Prius fiasco, with at least one likely hoax.  Multiply that by thouands.  Just saying.</p><p>4) Admitting your product is this dangerous will bring out all the past victims demanding compensation.  You think asbestos was expensive?</p><p>Now, I've seen SawStop demonstrated.  It is frighteningly effective.  And the testimonials are similarly shocking.  Like a school teacher testifying that it saved him and a student's thumb the first semester it was used.  I was taught safety as part of everything I did with a table saw, and the demonstration back then was, coincidentally, a hot dog.  Boy, does a Delta saw go through hot dogs real good...  We understood that our fingers would not be saved. And our teacher failed one kid and sent him to study hall after he violated safety procedures a third time.  I know this teacher saved me a finger 25 years later.  I might buy a SawStop some day, but I watch what I'm doing, and I don't do enough to become comfortable and lazy.  Yet.</p><p>SawStop is expensive to use, but the cost of a finger/thumb/whatever makes that a bargain.  One most saw users will just not pay.  Do you know any long-time woodworkers?  How many of them have all their digits?  Not 100\%, I bet.</p><p>But the industry is avoiding this until the patents expire, and then they can incorporate it and charge up the wazoo.  IF they can get over the potential liability, the false claims of false triggering to avoid the parts cost, and the inevitable claims for injuries where the victim will say it didn't work.</p><p>And you can bypass SawStop on a saw, slice off something, and reconnect it.  Niiice.  Of course, who leaves blade guards and kickback pawls on anyways...</p><p>We are our own worst enemies.  And we expect someone else to pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Last week , a Boston jury ... " That 's all I needed to read to understand .
While East Texas juries are reknown for their patent infringement jurisprudence , Boston juries never met a victim they did n't love , no matter the circumstances .
And they never met a corporation they did n't think deserved to pay out a little cash .
No surprise at all here.The secondary problem is that saw manufacturers are well aware of SawStop technology , but refuse to give it any credence .
They both ignore and discreidt it for three reasons : 1 ) To admit it is effective is to make it desireable for their products , and implicitly state that their products are less safe than they might otherwise be.2 ) To actually incorporate it in their products wuld increase prices , possibly to the point that sales could decline .
A little.3 ) SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered , you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade .
Yes , please stop the flames , I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB .
But it will annoy people who have to pay out $ 100- $ 200 or more very time they trip it .
And many will claim it 'just triggered ' and demand refunds and free parts .
Witness the Prius fiasco , with at least one likely hoax .
Multiply that by thouands .
Just saying.4 ) Admitting your product is this dangerous will bring out all the past victims demanding compensation .
You think asbestos was expensive ? Now , I 've seen SawStop demonstrated .
It is frighteningly effective .
And the testimonials are similarly shocking .
Like a school teacher testifying that it saved him and a student 's thumb the first semester it was used .
I was taught safety as part of everything I did with a table saw , and the demonstration back then was , coincidentally , a hot dog .
Boy , does a Delta saw go through hot dogs real good... We understood that our fingers would not be saved .
And our teacher failed one kid and sent him to study hall after he violated safety procedures a third time .
I know this teacher saved me a finger 25 years later .
I might buy a SawStop some day , but I watch what I 'm doing , and I do n't do enough to become comfortable and lazy .
Yet.SawStop is expensive to use , but the cost of a finger/thumb/whatever makes that a bargain .
One most saw users will just not pay .
Do you know any long-time woodworkers ?
How many of them have all their digits ?
Not 100 \ % , I bet.But the industry is avoiding this until the patents expire , and then they can incorporate it and charge up the wazoo .
IF they can get over the potential liability , the false claims of false triggering to avoid the parts cost , and the inevitable claims for injuries where the victim will say it did n't work.And you can bypass SawStop on a saw , slice off something , and reconnect it .
Niiice. Of course , who leaves blade guards and kickback pawls on anyways...We are our own worst enemies .
And we expect someone else to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Last week, a Boston jury ..."That's all I needed to read to understand.
While East Texas juries are reknown for their patent infringement jurisprudence, Boston juries never met a victim they didn't love, no matter the circumstances.
And they never met a corporation they didn't think deserved to pay out a little cash.
No surprise at all here.The secondary problem is that saw manufacturers are well aware of SawStop technology, but refuse to give it any credence.
They both ignore and discreidt it for three reasons:1) To admit it is effective is to make it desireable for their products, and implicitly state that their products are less safe than they might otherwise be.2) To actually incorporate it in their products wuld increase prices, possibly to the point that sales could decline.
A little.3) SawStop is expensive - when it is triggered, you get to replace the triggered components AND the saw blade.
Yes, please stop the flames, I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB.
But it will annoy people who have to pay out $100-$200 or more very time they trip it.
And many will claim it 'just triggered' and demand refunds and free parts.
Witness the Prius fiasco, with at least one likely hoax.
Multiply that by thouands.
Just saying.4) Admitting your product is this dangerous will bring out all the past victims demanding compensation.
You think asbestos was expensive?Now, I've seen SawStop demonstrated.
It is frighteningly effective.
And the testimonials are similarly shocking.
Like a school teacher testifying that it saved him and a student's thumb the first semester it was used.
I was taught safety as part of everything I did with a table saw, and the demonstration back then was, coincidentally, a hot dog.
Boy, does a Delta saw go through hot dogs real good...  We understood that our fingers would not be saved.
And our teacher failed one kid and sent him to study hall after he violated safety procedures a third time.
I know this teacher saved me a finger 25 years later.
I might buy a SawStop some day, but I watch what I'm doing, and I don't do enough to become comfortable and lazy.
Yet.SawStop is expensive to use, but the cost of a finger/thumb/whatever makes that a bargain.
One most saw users will just not pay.
Do you know any long-time woodworkers?
How many of them have all their digits?
Not 100\%, I bet.But the industry is avoiding this until the patents expire, and then they can incorporate it and charge up the wazoo.
IF they can get over the potential liability, the false claims of false triggering to avoid the parts cost, and the inevitable claims for injuries where the victim will say it didn't work.And you can bypass SawStop on a saw, slice off something, and reconnect it.
Niiice.  Of course, who leaves blade guards and kickback pawls on anyways...We are our own worst enemies.
And we expect someone else to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547092</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1269016140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.</p><p>Getting legal advice from slashdot is like getting auto advice from a plumber.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed.Getting legal advice from slashdot is like getting auto advice from a plumber .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.Getting legal advice from slashdot is like getting auto advice from a plumber.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544384</id>
	<title>Re:Not "the government"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the jury didn't hold anything specific about saw blades or patented technologies. All the jury held was that the company was negligent in not including this safety feature. (That's doubtful, in my opinion, but maybe the jury is better informed than I am, having heard the testimony.) The only thing the law requires is that people (and companies) act with due care. The jury said they didn't.</p><p>Furthermore, jury trials generally do not set precedent in the legal sense. No judge is going to say, "Well, a jury reached such and such a conclusion in the Ryobi case, so that's going to be the law now." Instead, each case has to be separately put before a jury (or they can be consolidated into a class action suit). An appeals court may strike down or uphold the verdict, thereby setting precedent, but the verdict itself won't do so.</p><p>IANAL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the jury did n't hold anything specific about saw blades or patented technologies .
All the jury held was that the company was negligent in not including this safety feature .
( That 's doubtful , in my opinion , but maybe the jury is better informed than I am , having heard the testimony .
) The only thing the law requires is that people ( and companies ) act with due care .
The jury said they did n't.Furthermore , jury trials generally do not set precedent in the legal sense .
No judge is going to say , " Well , a jury reached such and such a conclusion in the Ryobi case , so that 's going to be the law now .
" Instead , each case has to be separately put before a jury ( or they can be consolidated into a class action suit ) .
An appeals court may strike down or uphold the verdict , thereby setting precedent , but the verdict itself wo n't do so.IANAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the jury didn't hold anything specific about saw blades or patented technologies.
All the jury held was that the company was negligent in not including this safety feature.
(That's doubtful, in my opinion, but maybe the jury is better informed than I am, having heard the testimony.
) The only thing the law requires is that people (and companies) act with due care.
The jury said they didn't.Furthermore, jury trials generally do not set precedent in the legal sense.
No judge is going to say, "Well, a jury reached such and such a conclusion in the Ryobi case, so that's going to be the law now.
" Instead, each case has to be separately put before a jury (or they can be consolidated into a class action suit).
An appeals court may strike down or uphold the verdict, thereby setting precedent, but the verdict itself won't do so.IANAL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944</id>
	<title>sue everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems like Americans must always sue everyone even if they are simply stupid. Would you also sue a knife producing factory just because you did not know you could kill a human with it? Hello! It's your responsibility!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like Americans must always sue everyone even if they are simply stupid .
Would you also sue a knife producing factory just because you did not know you could kill a human with it ?
Hello ! It 's your responsibility !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like Americans must always sue everyone even if they are simply stupid.
Would you also sue a knife producing factory just because you did not know you could kill a human with it?
Hello! It's your responsibility!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544652</id>
	<title>Quitcher hyperventilatin'...</title>
	<author>jjohnson</author>
	<datestamp>1268996880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When courts mandate the use of patented or copyrighted or licencable technology, they also set a reasonable licencing fee.  The court's ultimate goal in its ruling is to protect the consumer, so creating a de facto monopoly for a patent holder and allowing him to charge $1,000,000 per use doesn't meet that goal.  If the SawStop technology becomes legally mandated by this ruling, the court will also set a reasonable fee for SawStop to charge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When courts mandate the use of patented or copyrighted or licencable technology , they also set a reasonable licencing fee .
The court 's ultimate goal in its ruling is to protect the consumer , so creating a de facto monopoly for a patent holder and allowing him to charge $ 1,000,000 per use does n't meet that goal .
If the SawStop technology becomes legally mandated by this ruling , the court will also set a reasonable fee for SawStop to charge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When courts mandate the use of patented or copyrighted or licencable technology, they also set a reasonable licencing fee.
The court's ultimate goal in its ruling is to protect the consumer, so creating a de facto monopoly for a patent holder and allowing him to charge $1,000,000 per use doesn't meet that goal.
If the SawStop technology becomes legally mandated by this ruling, the court will also set a reasonable fee for SawStop to charge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545124</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268999160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add to that - Having a chainmail glove on would probably mean your whole hand would get pulled in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add to that - Having a chainmail glove on would probably mean your whole hand would get pulled in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add to that - Having a chainmail glove on would probably mean your whole hand would get pulled in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547214</id>
	<title>Re:Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>microcars</author>
	<datestamp>1269018000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A friend of mine has a Scene Shop that owns two Saw Stop machines.<br>
You can turn OFF the Saw Stop feature if you want.
<br> <br>
After going through about a half dozen blades and brakes they now shut off the Saw Stop feature for:<br>
Cutting plastics<br>
Cutting aluminum sheet.<br> <br>

They don't cut wet wood so it is not really a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend of mine has a Scene Shop that owns two Saw Stop machines .
You can turn OFF the Saw Stop feature if you want .
After going through about a half dozen blades and brakes they now shut off the Saw Stop feature for : Cutting plastics Cutting aluminum sheet .
They do n't cut wet wood so it is not really a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend of mine has a Scene Shop that owns two Saw Stop machines.
You can turn OFF the Saw Stop feature if you want.
After going through about a half dozen blades and brakes they now shut off the Saw Stop feature for:
Cutting plastics
Cutting aluminum sheet.
They don't cut wet wood so it is not really a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544056</id>
	<title>Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It seemed, for this industry, a fundamental discovery," Fanning said. "I'd never seen anything like it."

</p><p>The demo is pretty impressive: <a href="http://www.sawstop.com/howitworks/videos.php" title="sawstop.com">http://www.sawstop.com/howitworks/videos.php</a> [sawstop.com]

</p><p>Seems to test conductivity, probably between the table and the blade</p><blockquote><div><p>7. Can I cut conductive materials?
</p><p>"Yes. You can operate the saw in Bypass Mode which deactivates the safety system's braking feature, allowing you to cut aluminum and other known conductive materials. If you are unsure if the material you need to cut is conductive, you can make test cuts using Bypass Mode to determine if it will activate the safety system's brake. "</p></div></blockquote><p>The mechanics are pretty cool.  It seems to use the momentum of the blade itself to stop the cut.  The electrics are trivial, combining the electrics and the mechanics to create a safety feature isn't something I would have thought of... it'd destroy my saw<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" It seemed , for this industry , a fundamental discovery , " Fanning said .
" I 'd never seen anything like it .
" The demo is pretty impressive : http : //www.sawstop.com/howitworks/videos.php [ sawstop.com ] Seems to test conductivity , probably between the table and the blade7 .
Can I cut conductive materials ?
" Yes. You can operate the saw in Bypass Mode which deactivates the safety system 's braking feature , allowing you to cut aluminum and other known conductive materials .
If you are unsure if the material you need to cut is conductive , you can make test cuts using Bypass Mode to determine if it will activate the safety system 's brake .
" The mechanics are pretty cool .
It seems to use the momentum of the blade itself to stop the cut .
The electrics are trivial , combining the electrics and the mechanics to create a safety feature is n't something I would have thought of... it 'd destroy my saw : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It seemed, for this industry, a fundamental discovery," Fanning said.
"I'd never seen anything like it.
"

The demo is pretty impressive: http://www.sawstop.com/howitworks/videos.php [sawstop.com]

Seems to test conductivity, probably between the table and the blade7.
Can I cut conductive materials?
"Yes. You can operate the saw in Bypass Mode which deactivates the safety system's braking feature, allowing you to cut aluminum and other known conductive materials.
If you are unsure if the material you need to cut is conductive, you can make test cuts using Bypass Mode to determine if it will activate the safety system's brake.
"The mechanics are pretty cool.
It seems to use the momentum of the blade itself to stop the cut.
The electrics are trivial, combining the electrics and the mechanics to create a safety feature isn't something I would have thought of... it'd destroy my saw :-)
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546526</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>karlandtanya</author>
	<datestamp>1269009960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second that one.<br>One safety class I took they showed us "gore" pictures of what can happen if you wear gloves around a drill press.<br>Did you know your finger is about 2 feet long?  If you count the tendons and muscles that get yanked out of your arm along with the finger!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second that one.One safety class I took they showed us " gore " pictures of what can happen if you wear gloves around a drill press.Did you know your finger is about 2 feet long ?
If you count the tendons and muscles that get yanked out of your arm along with the finger !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second that one.One safety class I took they showed us "gore" pictures of what can happen if you wear gloves around a drill press.Did you know your finger is about 2 feet long?
If you count the tendons and muscles that get yanked out of your arm along with the finger!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>pz</author>
	<datestamp>1268994180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing.</p></div><p>Definitely.  I haven't read the Saw Stop patent, but I can think of three completely different ways to implement the same basic idea of stopping the saw blade quickly.  None are as good as Saw Stop (which is frelling brilliant and definitely non-obvious), but not implementing what might be considered basic safety technology (like a deadman's switch on a lawnmower, for example) can reasonably drive liability.  The unusual part of this case is that we are on the cusp of adoption of this particular -- but important, IMO -- safety technology.</p><p>In the article, Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology, and to have saved 700 fingers.  That is an insane injury rate, and if correct, shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are.  There's a solution to this safety issue, but Ryobi fully aware of the problem apparently chose not to license said solution.  Therefore they are liable.  I'm certain there's more to it than that (and, naturally, I'm not a lawyer), but there would seem to be a thread of logical reasoning in the decision.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing.Definitely .
I have n't read the Saw Stop patent , but I can think of three completely different ways to implement the same basic idea of stopping the saw blade quickly .
None are as good as Saw Stop ( which is frelling brilliant and definitely non-obvious ) , but not implementing what might be considered basic safety technology ( like a deadman 's switch on a lawnmower , for example ) can reasonably drive liability .
The unusual part of this case is that we are on the cusp of adoption of this particular -- but important , IMO -- safety technology.In the article , Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology , and to have saved 700 fingers .
That is an insane injury rate , and if correct , shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are .
There 's a solution to this safety issue , but Ryobi fully aware of the problem apparently chose not to license said solution .
Therefore they are liable .
I 'm certain there 's more to it than that ( and , naturally , I 'm not a lawyer ) , but there would seem to be a thread of logical reasoning in the decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing.Definitely.
I haven't read the Saw Stop patent, but I can think of three completely different ways to implement the same basic idea of stopping the saw blade quickly.
None are as good as Saw Stop (which is frelling brilliant and definitely non-obvious), but not implementing what might be considered basic safety technology (like a deadman's switch on a lawnmower, for example) can reasonably drive liability.
The unusual part of this case is that we are on the cusp of adoption of this particular -- but important, IMO -- safety technology.In the article, Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology, and to have saved 700 fingers.
That is an insane injury rate, and if correct, shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are.
There's a solution to this safety issue, but Ryobi fully aware of the problem apparently chose not to license said solution.
Therefore they are liable.
I'm certain there's more to it than that (and, naturally, I'm not a lawyer), but there would seem to be a thread of logical reasoning in the decision.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546066</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>genik76</author>
	<datestamp>1269005220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So now you told what this lawsuit was not about. Thanks. What was it about then?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So now you told what this lawsuit was not about .
Thanks. What was it about then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So now you told what this lawsuit was not about.
Thanks. What was it about then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544322</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know the story is in "Your Rights Online" (the most horribly stretched category on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., btw), but nowhere do the title or the summary mention software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know the story is in " Your Rights Online " ( the most horribly stretched category on /. , btw ) , but nowhere do the title or the summary mention software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know the story is in "Your Rights Online" (the most horribly stretched category on /., btw), but nowhere do the title or the summary mention software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545224</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>gtbritishskull</author>
	<datestamp>1268999640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quick thought, though....</p><p>How accurate is this device (what is the false positive rate)?</p><p>If my saw has this device and I cut something to make it activate, can I sue the company to get the saw repaired?  The cost of an activation is not trivial.  Should my saw destroy itself because I decide to use it to open my hotdog packet?  Will I even be able to buy a table saw in the future to cut my hotdogs?</p><p>I think this technology is awesome, but what is the liability if it is mandated?  I am personally in favor of having choices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick thought , though....How accurate is this device ( what is the false positive rate ) ? If my saw has this device and I cut something to make it activate , can I sue the company to get the saw repaired ?
The cost of an activation is not trivial .
Should my saw destroy itself because I decide to use it to open my hotdog packet ?
Will I even be able to buy a table saw in the future to cut my hotdogs ? I think this technology is awesome , but what is the liability if it is mandated ?
I am personally in favor of having choices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick thought, though....How accurate is this device (what is the false positive rate)?If my saw has this device and I cut something to make it activate, can I sue the company to get the saw repaired?
The cost of an activation is not trivial.
Should my saw destroy itself because I decide to use it to open my hotdog packet?
Will I even be able to buy a table saw in the future to cut my hotdogs?I think this technology is awesome, but what is the liability if it is mandated?
I am personally in favor of having choices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545478</id>
	<title>Re:Because the goverment doesn't mandate it</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1269001320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is there REALLY anyone out there older than 3 that doesn't know a power saw can injure you?</p><p>The safety feature works except when it doesn't. If the workpiece is moist or otherwise slightly conductive, the mechanism will fire. That could get expensive and annoying very quickly at $169 per incident to get going again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there REALLY anyone out there older than 3 that does n't know a power saw can injure you ? The safety feature works except when it does n't .
If the workpiece is moist or otherwise slightly conductive , the mechanism will fire .
That could get expensive and annoying very quickly at $ 169 per incident to get going again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there REALLY anyone out there older than 3 that doesn't know a power saw can injure you?The safety feature works except when it doesn't.
If the workpiece is moist or otherwise slightly conductive, the mechanism will fire.
That could get expensive and annoying very quickly at $169 per incident to get going again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544618</id>
	<title>Is the cigarette Jury and Judge Back?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268996700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on.  Stupid people can never be protected from themselves.</p><p>In my state, the tobacco companies lost hundreds of millions of dollars because folks claimed they didn't know smoking was harmful the last 40 years.</p><p>Let's blame McDonald's for that first hot coffee case they lost.</p><p>As to that saw, I bet in the instructions were many warnings that dismemberment was possible if the saw was used improperly. Too bad they didn't cut the head off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on .
Stupid people can never be protected from themselves.In my state , the tobacco companies lost hundreds of millions of dollars because folks claimed they did n't know smoking was harmful the last 40 years.Let 's blame McDonald 's for that first hot coffee case they lost.As to that saw , I bet in the instructions were many warnings that dismemberment was possible if the saw was used improperly .
Too bad they did n't cut the head off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on.
Stupid people can never be protected from themselves.In my state, the tobacco companies lost hundreds of millions of dollars because folks claimed they didn't know smoking was harmful the last 40 years.Let's blame McDonald's for that first hot coffee case they lost.As to that saw, I bet in the instructions were many warnings that dismemberment was possible if the saw was used improperly.
Too bad they didn't cut the head off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544902</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>c</author>
	<datestamp>1268998140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail.</p><p>At the same time, it would pull the hand inside the chainmail deeper into the blade...</p><p>If there's a situation where a glove might make you safer, it's in helping keep a grip on the wood you're feeding the saw and helping keep nasty splinters out of your fingers.</p><p>c.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail.At the same time , it would pull the hand inside the chainmail deeper into the blade...If there 's a situation where a glove might make you safer , it 's in helping keep a grip on the wood you 're feeding the saw and helping keep nasty splinters out of your fingers.c .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; A average table saw would be able to cut right through chainmail.At the same time, it would pull the hand inside the chainmail deeper into the blade...If there's a situation where a glove might make you safer, it's in helping keep a grip on the wood you're feeding the saw and helping keep nasty splinters out of your fingers.c.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31550848</id>
	<title>use it or loose it!</title>
	<author>josepha48</author>
	<datestamp>1269112920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stop the patent trolls from holding on to patents just to sit around and sue people.  The whole point of having a patent on something is to use it in the market place and license it to others so that you can make money off of it.  If you are not doing that then you should loose it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop the patent trolls from holding on to patents just to sit around and sue people .
The whole point of having a patent on something is to use it in the market place and license it to others so that you can make money off of it .
If you are not doing that then you should loose it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop the patent trolls from holding on to patents just to sit around and sue people.
The whole point of having a patent on something is to use it in the market place and license it to others so that you can make money off of it.
If you are not doing that then you should loose it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544166</id>
	<title>A different angle on this story...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't read this story properly the first time, which is why I ended up interpreting the story different (might be because the title was a little vague).</p><p>What happens if a company has a patent on a safety feature but then chooses NOT to implement it. Example: If a company has a cure for cancer but chooses not to produce it, and its patents prevent other companies from producing it, are they liable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't read this story properly the first time , which is why I ended up interpreting the story different ( might be because the title was a little vague ) .What happens if a company has a patent on a safety feature but then chooses NOT to implement it .
Example : If a company has a cure for cancer but chooses not to produce it , and its patents prevent other companies from producing it , are they liable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't read this story properly the first time, which is why I ended up interpreting the story different (might be because the title was a little vague).What happens if a company has a patent on a safety feature but then chooses NOT to implement it.
Example: If a company has a cure for cancer but chooses not to produce it, and its patents prevent other companies from producing it, are they liable?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544752</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>CODiNE</author>
	<datestamp>1268997360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Pushsticks to keep your fingers away, featherboards to reduce kickback</p></div></blockquote><p>First thing I made when I got my tablesaw!  Closest my fingers got was while making the pushstick, after that... never again.</p><p>But *I* googled how to use a tablesaw.</p><p>That guy...<br>What a maroon.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pushsticks to keep your fingers away , featherboards to reduce kickbackFirst thing I made when I got my tablesaw !
Closest my fingers got was while making the pushstick , after that... never again.But * I * googled how to use a tablesaw.That guy...What a maroon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pushsticks to keep your fingers away, featherboards to reduce kickbackFirst thing I made when I got my tablesaw!
Closest my fingers got was while making the pushstick, after that... never again.But *I* googled how to use a tablesaw.That guy...What a maroon.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548408</id>
	<title>Re:Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269085020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly, i occasionally work at construction sites and the wood there is often damp or very wet which would mean that i need to replace the blade several times a day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly , i occasionally work at construction sites and the wood there is often damp or very wet which would mean that i need to replace the blade several times a day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly, i occasionally work at construction sites and the wood there is often damp or very wet which would mean that i need to replace the blade several times a day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544858</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268997840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chaninmail will make it worst it will not only cut your finger but your whole hand if you're wearing one. I used to be a butcher, and the chainmail was a big nono whe using the saw. The saw will graw the chainmail and drag your whole hand inthere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chaninmail will make it worst it will not only cut your finger but your whole hand if you 're wearing one .
I used to be a butcher , and the chainmail was a big nono whe using the saw .
The saw will graw the chainmail and drag your whole hand inthere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chaninmail will make it worst it will not only cut your finger but your whole hand if you're wearing one.
I used to be a butcher, and the chainmail was a big nono whe using the saw.
The saw will graw the chainmail and drag your whole hand inthere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544086</id>
	<title>Because the goverment doesn't mandate it</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1268994360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is no mandate to implement an emergency stop in a table saw. Maybe there should be, but there isn't. So it ain't the same.
</p><p>Could you sue car-makers that did NOT introduce safety belts as soon as they became available?
</p><p>Mind you, I am in two minds about this. A working safety feature exists, so why is it not implemented? This story has come up before, and while the guy who has the patent wants money I find it hard to sympathize with the poor power-tool companies who of course do NOT expect to be paid for the patents they own.
</p><p>I think much like the seatbelt thing, this is a case of greed and not wanting devices to appear to be unsafe. Because maybe if you put on the box "can cut your finger off" people would just hire someone to do their DIY for them. Could ruin the entire industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no mandate to implement an emergency stop in a table saw .
Maybe there should be , but there is n't .
So it ai n't the same .
Could you sue car-makers that did NOT introduce safety belts as soon as they became available ?
Mind you , I am in two minds about this .
A working safety feature exists , so why is it not implemented ?
This story has come up before , and while the guy who has the patent wants money I find it hard to sympathize with the poor power-tool companies who of course do NOT expect to be paid for the patents they own .
I think much like the seatbelt thing , this is a case of greed and not wanting devices to appear to be unsafe .
Because maybe if you put on the box " can cut your finger off " people would just hire someone to do their DIY for them .
Could ruin the entire industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no mandate to implement an emergency stop in a table saw.
Maybe there should be, but there isn't.
So it ain't the same.
Could you sue car-makers that did NOT introduce safety belts as soon as they became available?
Mind you, I am in two minds about this.
A working safety feature exists, so why is it not implemented?
This story has come up before, and while the guy who has the patent wants money I find it hard to sympathize with the poor power-tool companies who of course do NOT expect to be paid for the patents they own.
I think much like the seatbelt thing, this is a case of greed and not wanting devices to appear to be unsafe.
Because maybe if you put on the box "can cut your finger off" people would just hire someone to do their DIY for them.
Could ruin the entire industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544342</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>A story posted by kdawson being sensationalist and misleading? Unthinkable!</htmltext>
<tokenext>A story posted by kdawson being sensationalist and misleading ?
Unthinkable !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A story posted by kdawson being sensationalist and misleading?
Unthinkable!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547232</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1269018240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Are all car manufacturers that don't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems
now liable when drivers rear end someone?</i> <br>
<br>
By the precedent set in this particular case - Yes.<br>
<br>
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go drive around the block a few times.  In reverse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are all car manufacturers that do n't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems now liable when drivers rear end someone ?
By the precedent set in this particular case - Yes .
Now if you 'll excuse me , I need to go drive around the block a few times .
In reverse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are all car manufacturers that don't implement Mercedes new radar-guided emergency braking systems
now liable when drivers rear end someone?
By the precedent set in this particular case - Yes.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go drive around the block a few times.
In reverse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544992</id>
	<title>responsibility</title>
	<author>Zugok</author>
	<datestamp>1268998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though this may be about patents, this is also about whom has the responsibility of safety.  Its dangerous to put the responsibility of  safety in technology and not on the operator.  Technology will fail and people need to know how to react when that happens.  In this case, sure Ryobi can get a licence to use the technology but it  but the operator should just have been more careful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though this may be about patents , this is also about whom has the responsibility of safety .
Its dangerous to put the responsibility of safety in technology and not on the operator .
Technology will fail and people need to know how to react when that happens .
In this case , sure Ryobi can get a licence to use the technology but it but the operator should just have been more careful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though this may be about patents, this is also about whom has the responsibility of safety.
Its dangerous to put the responsibility of  safety in technology and not on the operator.
Technology will fail and people need to know how to react when that happens.
In this case, sure Ryobi can get a licence to use the technology but it  but the operator should just have been more careful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543824</id>
	<title>Don't Expect Anything to Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Democrats in general and the Obama Administration in specific are deep in the pockets of the liability lawyer lobby. They would never change the law to make more since if it was going to cost them money. Why do you think real malpractice reform was completely excluded from the Obamacare bill Pelosi is frantically trying to bribe its way to passage even as I write?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Democrats in general and the Obama Administration in specific are deep in the pockets of the liability lawyer lobby .
They would never change the law to make more since if it was going to cost them money .
Why do you think real malpractice reform was completely excluded from the Obamacare bill Pelosi is frantically trying to bribe its way to passage even as I write ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Democrats in general and the Obama Administration in specific are deep in the pockets of the liability lawyer lobby.
They would never change the law to make more since if it was going to cost them money.
Why do you think real malpractice reform was completely excluded from the Obamacare bill Pelosi is frantically trying to bribe its way to passage even as I write?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545402</id>
	<title>This misunderstands the legal system</title>
	<author>pacergh</author>
	<datestamp>1269000780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Court cases finding liability are not cases where the government mandates the use of saw technology.  Rather, by not having fundamentally safe characteristics to the saw, or appropriate warning labels, the court is finding the manufacturer liable for distributing a dangerous or defective product.</p><p>The authors on Techdirt just don't understand how the court system works, or what this means for power saws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Court cases finding liability are not cases where the government mandates the use of saw technology .
Rather , by not having fundamentally safe characteristics to the saw , or appropriate warning labels , the court is finding the manufacturer liable for distributing a dangerous or defective product.The authors on Techdirt just do n't understand how the court system works , or what this means for power saws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Court cases finding liability are not cases where the government mandates the use of saw technology.
Rather, by not having fundamentally safe characteristics to the saw, or appropriate warning labels, the court is finding the manufacturer liable for distributing a dangerous or defective product.The authors on Techdirt just don't understand how the court system works, or what this means for power saws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544172</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad example - airbags are required by law on all new cars (every new car after april 1 1989 has to have either airbags or automatic seat belts.)</p><p>I am unaware of any legal requirements for table saws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad example - airbags are required by law on all new cars ( every new car after april 1 1989 has to have either airbags or automatic seat belts .
) I am unaware of any legal requirements for table saws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad example - airbags are required by law on all new cars (every new car after april 1 1989 has to have either airbags or automatic seat belts.
)I am unaware of any legal requirements for table saws.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926</id>
	<title>Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"In documents submitted to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Power Tool Institute has claimed that replacing the cost of SawStop's brake, $69, and blade, about $100, after an incident would burden consumers."</p><p>Yeah? So it is less of a burden to replace my fingers?</p><p>Saw Stop is one of the best things to ever happen to power tools. It is the airbags and seatbelts equivalent for power tools. Actually, it is even better than airbags, as it avoids an accident altogether. I hope their approach spreads to all other power tools. I am a woodworker, and am terrified by the fact that in a fraction of a second I can screw up and change my entire life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In documents submitted to the Consumer Product Safety Commission , the Power Tool Institute has claimed that replacing the cost of SawStop 's brake , $ 69 , and blade , about $ 100 , after an incident would burden consumers. " Yeah ?
So it is less of a burden to replace my fingers ? Saw Stop is one of the best things to ever happen to power tools .
It is the airbags and seatbelts equivalent for power tools .
Actually , it is even better than airbags , as it avoids an accident altogether .
I hope their approach spreads to all other power tools .
I am a woodworker , and am terrified by the fact that in a fraction of a second I can screw up and change my entire life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In documents submitted to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Power Tool Institute has claimed that replacing the cost of SawStop's brake, $69, and blade, about $100, after an incident would burden consumers."Yeah?
So it is less of a burden to replace my fingers?Saw Stop is one of the best things to ever happen to power tools.
It is the airbags and seatbelts equivalent for power tools.
Actually, it is even better than airbags, as it avoids an accident altogether.
I hope their approach spreads to all other power tools.
I am a woodworker, and am terrified by the fact that in a fraction of a second I can screw up and change my entire life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548918</id>
	<title>Eminent Domain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269093900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If this is truly a matter of public safety, such that saw manufactures will be required to use this patented technology (b/c of common law ruling), then the government should be able to intercede with some form of eminent domain, paying the inventor a reasonable compensation and making the technology public accessible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is truly a matter of public safety , such that saw manufactures will be required to use this patented technology ( b/c of common law ruling ) , then the government should be able to intercede with some form of eminent domain , paying the inventor a reasonable compensation and making the technology public accessible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is truly a matter of public safety, such that saw manufactures will be required to use this patented technology (b/c of common law ruling), then the government should be able to intercede with some form of eminent domain, paying the inventor a reasonable compensation and making the technology public accessible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</id>
	<title>Horrible summary</title>
	<author>clang\_jangle</author>
	<datestamp>1268993460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The case is not about patented software, it's about liability due to lack of modern safety technology.
The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant, a FOSS alternative would be just as good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The case is not about patented software , it 's about liability due to lack of modern safety technology .
The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant , a FOSS alternative would be just as good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The case is not about patented software, it's about liability due to lack of modern safety technology.
The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant, a FOSS alternative would be just as good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543992</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1268994000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But how much?  I have a pretty inexpensive table saw with "only" a 1.5 HP motor, yet I don't see chain mail (at least any kind that would still make handling wood at the saw comfortable/safe) gloves as being able to realistically stop the blade at speed.</p><p>For guys using bigger saws with, say, 3 HP motors, it seems like there'd be no use in wearing them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how much ?
I have a pretty inexpensive table saw with " only " a 1.5 HP motor , yet I do n't see chain mail ( at least any kind that would still make handling wood at the saw comfortable/safe ) gloves as being able to realistically stop the blade at speed.For guys using bigger saws with , say , 3 HP motors , it seems like there 'd be no use in wearing them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how much?
I have a pretty inexpensive table saw with "only" a 1.5 HP motor, yet I don't see chain mail (at least any kind that would still make handling wood at the saw comfortable/safe) gloves as being able to realistically stop the blade at speed.For guys using bigger saws with, say, 3 HP motors, it seems like there'd be no use in wearing them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546218</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269006540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Caution - this machine has no brain. Use your own.</p><p>I own a Delta Unisaw, it's old and I am sure many people here would call it unsafe. Take off my rings and think about the cut I'm going to make. Don't stand behind the saw. Use featherboards and pushsticks as noted above. If you think something is unsafe, don't do it. And really, any machinery is dangerous in the wrong hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Caution - this machine has no brain .
Use your own.I own a Delta Unisaw , it 's old and I am sure many people here would call it unsafe .
Take off my rings and think about the cut I 'm going to make .
Do n't stand behind the saw .
Use featherboards and pushsticks as noted above .
If you think something is unsafe , do n't do it .
And really , any machinery is dangerous in the wrong hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Caution - this machine has no brain.
Use your own.I own a Delta Unisaw, it's old and I am sure many people here would call it unsafe.
Take off my rings and think about the cut I'm going to make.
Don't stand behind the saw.
Use featherboards and pushsticks as noted above.
If you think something is unsafe, don't do it.
And really, any machinery is dangerous in the wrong hands.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546974</id>
	<title>Re:Financially viable?</title>
	<author>gillbates</author>
	<datestamp>1269014700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
They're not trying to destroy woodworking so much as they're trying to bolster a dying industry.  Look, my father spent a fifth of the cost of a new car on a lathe in 1982.  Back then, a table saw was very expensive.
</p><p>
When I installed my pergo flooring, I spent $60 on a table saw with the mitre bench.  Heck, I've spent more dining out than some of these things cost these days.  The Chinese can make them for pennies on SawStop's dollar, and that *really* scares them.  The solution?  A patented technology costing more than the saw itself.
</p><p>
While I really hate the fact that we've succumbed to cowardice, this isn't really the death knell of woodworking.  I had a power drill when I was five.  Now I use a hand drill.  Not merely because of the safety aspect, but also because of the control.  I don't need a scrap backstop to keep from ripping out the exit hole, and I can use it with my son standing around watching.
</p><p>
While I'll admit there are advantages to power tools, any sufficiently advanced geek is going to build his own.  The others, like me, get to enjoy a hobby without the danger of losing limbs.  I honestly wouldn't use a power saw around my kids regardless of the safety features it might otherwise possess.  SawStop still won't keep a saw from kicking out a piece of scrap.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not trying to destroy woodworking so much as they 're trying to bolster a dying industry .
Look , my father spent a fifth of the cost of a new car on a lathe in 1982 .
Back then , a table saw was very expensive .
When I installed my pergo flooring , I spent $ 60 on a table saw with the mitre bench .
Heck , I 've spent more dining out than some of these things cost these days .
The Chinese can make them for pennies on SawStop 's dollar , and that * really * scares them .
The solution ?
A patented technology costing more than the saw itself .
While I really hate the fact that we 've succumbed to cowardice , this is n't really the death knell of woodworking .
I had a power drill when I was five .
Now I use a hand drill .
Not merely because of the safety aspect , but also because of the control .
I do n't need a scrap backstop to keep from ripping out the exit hole , and I can use it with my son standing around watching .
While I 'll admit there are advantages to power tools , any sufficiently advanced geek is going to build his own .
The others , like me , get to enjoy a hobby without the danger of losing limbs .
I honestly would n't use a power saw around my kids regardless of the safety features it might otherwise possess .
SawStop still wo n't keep a saw from kicking out a piece of scrap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
They're not trying to destroy woodworking so much as they're trying to bolster a dying industry.
Look, my father spent a fifth of the cost of a new car on a lathe in 1982.
Back then, a table saw was very expensive.
When I installed my pergo flooring, I spent $60 on a table saw with the mitre bench.
Heck, I've spent more dining out than some of these things cost these days.
The Chinese can make them for pennies on SawStop's dollar, and that *really* scares them.
The solution?
A patented technology costing more than the saw itself.
While I really hate the fact that we've succumbed to cowardice, this isn't really the death knell of woodworking.
I had a power drill when I was five.
Now I use a hand drill.
Not merely because of the safety aspect, but also because of the control.
I don't need a scrap backstop to keep from ripping out the exit hole, and I can use it with my son standing around watching.
While I'll admit there are advantages to power tools, any sufficiently advanced geek is going to build his own.
The others, like me, get to enjoy a hobby without the danger of losing limbs.
I honestly wouldn't use a power saw around my kids regardless of the safety features it might otherwise possess.
SawStop still won't keep a saw from kicking out a piece of scrap.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544710</id>
	<title>Re:But wait!</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1268997120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't it SOP to wear properly insulated work boots when working with power tools? Also, some specialty blades are $400 and up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it SOP to wear properly insulated work boots when working with power tools ?
Also , some specialty blades are $ 400 and up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it SOP to wear properly insulated work boots when working with power tools?
Also, some specialty blades are $400 and up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545092</id>
	<title>Re:But wait!</title>
	<author>EvanED</author>
	<datestamp>1268999040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why SawStop saws have switches to disable the safety feature, for when you're cutting wet wood etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why SawStop saws have switches to disable the safety feature , for when you 're cutting wet wood etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why SawStop saws have switches to disable the safety feature, for when you're cutting wet wood etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547872</id>
	<title>Re:FTFA...</title>
	<author>DedTV</author>
	<datestamp>1269115320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB.</p></div><p>Is it? How much does it cost to reattach a finger or a thumb?
Millions of people use saws every year and <b>don't</b> cut off their fingers. If every one of those people had to pay an extra $169 when they buy a saw the total costs would seem to be astronomical. Seems it'd be cheaper to add a $5 "Severed Appendage Tax" to all power tools to cover the costs of reattaching fingers than it would be to require it on all saws.

It's getting to the point where it seems the only option is to hold a safety course and make people sign a release before you sell them a cup of coffee.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB.Is it ?
How much does it cost to reattach a finger or a thumb ?
Millions of people use saws every year and do n't cut off their fingers .
If every one of those people had to pay an extra $ 169 when they buy a saw the total costs would seem to be astronomical .
Seems it 'd be cheaper to add a $ 5 " Severed Appendage Tax " to all power tools to cover the costs of reattaching fingers than it would be to require it on all saws .
It 's getting to the point where it seems the only option is to hold a safety course and make people sign a release before you sell them a cup of coffee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I KNOW IT IS CHEAPER THAN A FINGER OR THUMB.Is it?
How much does it cost to reattach a finger or a thumb?
Millions of people use saws every year and don't cut off their fingers.
If every one of those people had to pay an extra $169 when they buy a saw the total costs would seem to be astronomical.
Seems it'd be cheaper to add a $5 "Severed Appendage Tax" to all power tools to cover the costs of reattaching fingers than it would be to require it on all saws.
It's getting to the point where it seems the only option is to hold a safety course and make people sign a release before you sell them a cup of coffee.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544398</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1268995800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a chain mail glove would be a horrible idea.  Instead of a fairly clean cut off finger that could most likely be stitched back on, you'd have a crushed and mutilated hand as the blade pulled the chain mail and your hand into that little slot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a chain mail glove would be a horrible idea .
Instead of a fairly clean cut off finger that could most likely be stitched back on , you 'd have a crushed and mutilated hand as the blade pulled the chain mail and your hand into that little slot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a chain mail glove would be a horrible idea.
Instead of a fairly clean cut off finger that could most likely be stitched back on, you'd have a crushed and mutilated hand as the blade pulled the chain mail and your hand into that little slot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544328</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1268995440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a currently accepted solution.  In fact I'm pretty sure the only place this exists is in the patent holders prototypes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a currently accepted solution .
In fact I 'm pretty sure the only place this exists is in the patent holders prototypes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a currently accepted solution.
In fact I'm pretty sure the only place this exists is in the patent holders prototypes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544668</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>Zak3056</author>
	<datestamp>1268996880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>. However, if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount (and I'd consider anything under $50 per saw to be "reasonable"), then I'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury.</p></div></blockquote><p>A consumer grade table saw can go for as little as a couple of hundred bucks.  You'd be marking a $500 saw up 10\% just for the patent royalties, which would probably equal or exceed the manufacturer's profit on the saw... and for something like a sub-$100 Harbor Freight piece of junk, the markup would be absurd.</p><p>Note, I went to the website and watched the videos.  This appears to be an <b> <i>extremely</i></b>  clever invention, certainly deserving of patent protection, and the world should beat a path to their door for building a better mousetrap. But I disagree that licensing their patent should be compulsory.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
However , if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount ( and I 'd consider anything under $ 50 per saw to be " reasonable " ) , then I 'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury.A consumer grade table saw can go for as little as a couple of hundred bucks .
You 'd be marking a $ 500 saw up 10 \ % just for the patent royalties , which would probably equal or exceed the manufacturer 's profit on the saw... and for something like a sub- $ 100 Harbor Freight piece of junk , the markup would be absurd.Note , I went to the website and watched the videos .
This appears to be an extremely clever invention , certainly deserving of patent protection , and the world should beat a path to their door for building a better mousetrap .
But I disagree that licensing their patent should be compulsory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
However, if SawStop was asking for some reasonable amount (and I'd consider anything under $50 per saw to be "reasonable"), then I'd surely consider casting my vote for the plaintiff if I were on the jury.A consumer grade table saw can go for as little as a couple of hundred bucks.
You'd be marking a $500 saw up 10\% just for the patent royalties, which would probably equal or exceed the manufacturer's profit on the saw... and for something like a sub-$100 Harbor Freight piece of junk, the markup would be absurd.Note, I went to the website and watched the videos.
This appears to be an  extremely  clever invention, certainly deserving of patent protection, and the world should beat a path to their door for building a better mousetrap.
But I disagree that licensing their patent should be compulsory.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544872</id>
	<title>We must protect the idiots from themselves...</title>
	<author>m509272</author>
	<datestamp>1268997960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This feeling that "the government" or "the law" must protect the idiots from themselves has got to stop.  I guess we'll need to convert gas stoves to electric because they should have eliminated the flame so that a towel dropped onto a lit burner would light up quicker than if it was an electric burner.  But then again, maybe it shouldn't be electric because that will likely start a fire eventually so we should all just have magnetic induction stoves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This feeling that " the government " or " the law " must protect the idiots from themselves has got to stop .
I guess we 'll need to convert gas stoves to electric because they should have eliminated the flame so that a towel dropped onto a lit burner would light up quicker than if it was an electric burner .
But then again , maybe it should n't be electric because that will likely start a fire eventually so we should all just have magnetic induction stoves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This feeling that "the government" or "the law" must protect the idiots from themselves has got to stop.
I guess we'll need to convert gas stoves to electric because they should have eliminated the flame so that a towel dropped onto a lit burner would light up quicker than if it was an electric burner.
But then again, maybe it shouldn't be electric because that will likely start a fire eventually so we should all just have magnetic induction stoves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544314</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely sure about the IP IS DEH EVILS Ton</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1268995320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One detail: a saw table with this feature will cost about 70\% more to manufacture than one without.<br>A saw table is an extremely simple tool. A saw, a table, a motor, two bearings, one belt, one switch. I've seen countless ones home-made. This system at least doubles the complexity.</p><p>What if I prefer to save the money? If I want to choose a table without this simply because it will be vastly cheaper?</p><p>Or if I know I will be using it only with conductive materials, and so the feature is useless for me?</p><p>Next, following <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/01/30/0137220/Gun-With-Wireless-Arming-Signal-Goes-On-Sale-Soon?art\_pos=1" title="slashdot.org">http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/01/30/0137220/Gun-With-Wireless-Arming-Signal-Goes-On-Sale-Soon?art\_pos=1</a> [slashdot.org] entering PIN code will become mandatory to shoot any gun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One detail : a saw table with this feature will cost about 70 \ % more to manufacture than one without.A saw table is an extremely simple tool .
A saw , a table , a motor , two bearings , one belt , one switch .
I 've seen countless ones home-made .
This system at least doubles the complexity.What if I prefer to save the money ?
If I want to choose a table without this simply because it will be vastly cheaper ? Or if I know I will be using it only with conductive materials , and so the feature is useless for me ? Next , following http : //news.slashdot.org/story/10/01/30/0137220/Gun-With-Wireless-Arming-Signal-Goes-On-Sale-Soon ? art \ _pos = 1 [ slashdot.org ] entering PIN code will become mandatory to shoot any gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One detail: a saw table with this feature will cost about 70\% more to manufacture than one without.A saw table is an extremely simple tool.
A saw, a table, a motor, two bearings, one belt, one switch.
I've seen countless ones home-made.
This system at least doubles the complexity.What if I prefer to save the money?
If I want to choose a table without this simply because it will be vastly cheaper?Or if I know I will be using it only with conductive materials, and so the feature is useless for me?Next, following http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/01/30/0137220/Gun-With-Wireless-Arming-Signal-Goes-On-Sale-Soon?art\_pos=1 [slashdot.org] entering PIN code will become mandatory to shoot any gun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544136</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>mcvos</author>
	<datestamp>1268994600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant, a FOSS alternative would be just as good.</p></div><p>No it wouldn't. It's about power tools, which are hardware. Software, open source or otherwise, won't help you here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant , a FOSS alternative would be just as good.No it would n't .
It 's about power tools , which are hardware .
Software , open source or otherwise , wo n't help you here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that the currently accepted solution is patented is irrelevant, a FOSS alternative would be just as good.No it wouldn't.
It's about power tools, which are hardware.
Software, open source or otherwise, won't help you here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545600</id>
	<title>Re:Saw Stop is great</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1269002280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's $169 per incident. Note that incident doesn't necessarily mean your finger would be cut, it can also be the wood was wet or had conductive paint on it.</p><p>Seat belts are a great safety feature. They're inexpensive, durable, and effective. Air bags are more questionable. They're expensive and effective, not durable, and have killed a few children in otherwise harmless fender benders.</p><p>Safety glass is moderately inexpensive, durable (compared to plate glass) and effective.</p><p>Is your current saw equipped with SawStop? It IS available for a price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's $ 169 per incident .
Note that incident does n't necessarily mean your finger would be cut , it can also be the wood was wet or had conductive paint on it.Seat belts are a great safety feature .
They 're inexpensive , durable , and effective .
Air bags are more questionable .
They 're expensive and effective , not durable , and have killed a few children in otherwise harmless fender benders.Safety glass is moderately inexpensive , durable ( compared to plate glass ) and effective.Is your current saw equipped with SawStop ?
It IS available for a price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's $169 per incident.
Note that incident doesn't necessarily mean your finger would be cut, it can also be the wood was wet or had conductive paint on it.Seat belts are a great safety feature.
They're inexpensive, durable, and effective.
Air bags are more questionable.
They're expensive and effective, not durable, and have killed a few children in otherwise harmless fender benders.Safety glass is moderately inexpensive, durable (compared to plate glass) and effective.Is your current saw equipped with SawStop?
It IS available for a price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545804</id>
	<title>How stupid were Ryobi's Lawyers?</title>
	<author>517714</author>
	<datestamp>1269003420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's see what questions do you, as Ryobi's lawyer, ask the plaintiff on cross examination:  "Could you explain the safety warnings on page 23 of the manual?  What! You don't know what warnings are on page 23?  You expect us to believe you read the manual?  You read ALL of the manual?  Do you speak and read French? How about Spanish?  Japanese? German? You just told us that you read ALL of the manual, but now you are telling us that you did not understand fully 80\% of it."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... After having demonstrated that the plaintiff didn't know what was in the manual with any degree of accuracy you continue.  "What certification do you hold in the use of power tools?  What accredited training programs have you completed in the use of power tools?  Don't you think that you should have taken some sort of refresher since your 7th grade shop class?"  And in the tradition of shows like Perry Mason<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... "Isn't a fact, sir, that you were born without a thumb on your right hand - that as a young man you attempted to hitchhike across the USA only to be thwarted by your lack of an opposable digit, that you bought a table saw because while you desparately wanted to be a dress designer you were unable to hold scissors, and that this trial is just a means for you to finance your bid to get on 'Project Runway' "  Yeah, the jurys love that stuff!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see what questions do you , as Ryobi 's lawyer , ask the plaintiff on cross examination : " Could you explain the safety warnings on page 23 of the manual ?
What ! You do n't know what warnings are on page 23 ?
You expect us to believe you read the manual ?
You read ALL of the manual ?
Do you speak and read French ?
How about Spanish ?
Japanese ? German ?
You just told us that you read ALL of the manual , but now you are telling us that you did not understand fully 80 \ % of it .
" ... After having demonstrated that the plaintiff did n't know what was in the manual with any degree of accuracy you continue .
" What certification do you hold in the use of power tools ?
What accredited training programs have you completed in the use of power tools ?
Do n't you think that you should have taken some sort of refresher since your 7th grade shop class ?
" And in the tradition of shows like Perry Mason ... " Is n't a fact , sir , that you were born without a thumb on your right hand - that as a young man you attempted to hitchhike across the USA only to be thwarted by your lack of an opposable digit , that you bought a table saw because while you desparately wanted to be a dress designer you were unable to hold scissors , and that this trial is just a means for you to finance your bid to get on 'Project Runway ' " Yeah , the jurys love that stuff !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see what questions do you, as Ryobi's lawyer, ask the plaintiff on cross examination:  "Could you explain the safety warnings on page 23 of the manual?
What! You don't know what warnings are on page 23?
You expect us to believe you read the manual?
You read ALL of the manual?
Do you speak and read French?
How about Spanish?
Japanese? German?
You just told us that you read ALL of the manual, but now you are telling us that you did not understand fully 80\% of it.
" ... After having demonstrated that the plaintiff didn't know what was in the manual with any degree of accuracy you continue.
"What certification do you hold in the use of power tools?
What accredited training programs have you completed in the use of power tools?
Don't you think that you should have taken some sort of refresher since your 7th grade shop class?
"  And in the tradition of shows like Perry Mason ... "Isn't a fact, sir, that you were born without a thumb on your right hand - that as a young man you attempted to hitchhike across the USA only to be thwarted by your lack of an opposable digit, that you bought a table saw because while you desparately wanted to be a dress designer you were unable to hold scissors, and that this trial is just a means for you to finance your bid to get on 'Project Runway' "  Yeah, the jurys love that stuff!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547972</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Tycho</author>
	<datestamp>1269117300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually the pinkie finger is very important, it is prehensile and thus can move away from the ring finger, which makes it extremely useful for grasping objects.  IIRC, this is also a trait unique to humans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the pinkie finger is very important , it is prehensile and thus can move away from the ring finger , which makes it extremely useful for grasping objects .
IIRC , this is also a trait unique to humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the pinkie finger is very important, it is prehensile and thus can move away from the ring finger, which makes it extremely useful for grasping objects.
IIRC, this is also a trait unique to humans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548446</id>
	<title>Do your research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269085680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here are some facts. All of them were gleaned from web searches in the space of 2 hours.</p><p>Stephen Gass invented his table saw safety system in 1999.</p><p>He first showed it at the 2000 International Woodworking Machinery and Furniture Supply Fair.</p><p>He then pitched it to table saw manufacturers in the US, who all balked at the cost to add the system to their saws, the still experimental nature of the design and what they considered outrageous licensing fees.</p><p>In 2003, Gass petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission to "...require performance standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."</p><p>In testimony with the CPSC Gass admitted that the standards he proposed could only be met by his invention but that he would license the invention to any manufacturer. He also stated that the licensing fees would be 8\% of the wholesale price of the product.</p><p>Such inventions are usually licensed as a percentage of the manufacturing cost of product and typically up to 5\%.</p><p>There are now 50 lawsuits against various manufacturers to include "flesh-detection" technology in their products. Stephen Gass himself participated in the lawsuit mentioned in this topic as an expert witness for the prosecution.</p><p>Stephen F. Gass now has 56 different patents on various saw types (miter saws, bandsaws, etc) for safety systems.</p><p>Anybody with a moderate amount of web-savvy can duplicate this research. It's all a matter of public record. Draw your own conclusions.</p><p>What I see is a man who invented something, tried to charge more than the going rate for it and then decided to use government mandate to force adoption of his technology. At the same time he is using the judicial system and a lot of frivolous lawsuits to force manufacturers to pay his price. How long do you think it will be before the CPSC is petitioned to require standards that guarantee Gass's technology on every type of saw sold in America?</p><p>I have no financial interest in any of these proceedings except as a woodworker. Stephen Gass manufactures tablesaws that use his technology (SawStop). Not surprisingly, SawStop tablesaws are more expensive than equivalent tablesaws from other manufacturers. What I see in the future is an increase in the price of every piece of woodworking equipment sold just to include safety equipment that I do not need. I have all ten of my fingers thank you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here are some facts .
All of them were gleaned from web searches in the space of 2 hours.Stephen Gass invented his table saw safety system in 1999.He first showed it at the 2000 International Woodworking Machinery and Furniture Supply Fair.He then pitched it to table saw manufacturers in the US , who all balked at the cost to add the system to their saws , the still experimental nature of the design and what they considered outrageous licensing fees.In 2003 , Gass petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission to " ...require performance standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw .
" In testimony with the CPSC Gass admitted that the standards he proposed could only be met by his invention but that he would license the invention to any manufacturer .
He also stated that the licensing fees would be 8 \ % of the wholesale price of the product.Such inventions are usually licensed as a percentage of the manufacturing cost of product and typically up to 5 \ % .There are now 50 lawsuits against various manufacturers to include " flesh-detection " technology in their products .
Stephen Gass himself participated in the lawsuit mentioned in this topic as an expert witness for the prosecution.Stephen F. Gass now has 56 different patents on various saw types ( miter saws , bandsaws , etc ) for safety systems.Anybody with a moderate amount of web-savvy can duplicate this research .
It 's all a matter of public record .
Draw your own conclusions.What I see is a man who invented something , tried to charge more than the going rate for it and then decided to use government mandate to force adoption of his technology .
At the same time he is using the judicial system and a lot of frivolous lawsuits to force manufacturers to pay his price .
How long do you think it will be before the CPSC is petitioned to require standards that guarantee Gass 's technology on every type of saw sold in America ? I have no financial interest in any of these proceedings except as a woodworker .
Stephen Gass manufactures tablesaws that use his technology ( SawStop ) .
Not surprisingly , SawStop tablesaws are more expensive than equivalent tablesaws from other manufacturers .
What I see in the future is an increase in the price of every piece of woodworking equipment sold just to include safety equipment that I do not need .
I have all ten of my fingers thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here are some facts.
All of them were gleaned from web searches in the space of 2 hours.Stephen Gass invented his table saw safety system in 1999.He first showed it at the 2000 International Woodworking Machinery and Furniture Supply Fair.He then pitched it to table saw manufacturers in the US, who all balked at the cost to add the system to their saws, the still experimental nature of the design and what they considered outrageous licensing fees.In 2003, Gass petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission to "...require performance standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw.
"In testimony with the CPSC Gass admitted that the standards he proposed could only be met by his invention but that he would license the invention to any manufacturer.
He also stated that the licensing fees would be 8\% of the wholesale price of the product.Such inventions are usually licensed as a percentage of the manufacturing cost of product and typically up to 5\%.There are now 50 lawsuits against various manufacturers to include "flesh-detection" technology in their products.
Stephen Gass himself participated in the lawsuit mentioned in this topic as an expert witness for the prosecution.Stephen F. Gass now has 56 different patents on various saw types (miter saws, bandsaws, etc) for safety systems.Anybody with a moderate amount of web-savvy can duplicate this research.
It's all a matter of public record.
Draw your own conclusions.What I see is a man who invented something, tried to charge more than the going rate for it and then decided to use government mandate to force adoption of his technology.
At the same time he is using the judicial system and a lot of frivolous lawsuits to force manufacturers to pay his price.
How long do you think it will be before the CPSC is petitioned to require standards that guarantee Gass's technology on every type of saw sold in America?I have no financial interest in any of these proceedings except as a woodworker.
Stephen Gass manufactures tablesaws that use his technology (SawStop).
Not surprisingly, SawStop tablesaws are more expensive than equivalent tablesaws from other manufacturers.
What I see in the future is an increase in the price of every piece of woodworking equipment sold just to include safety equipment that I do not need.
I have all ten of my fingers thank you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544758</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>circusboy</author>
	<datestamp>1268997420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>gloves and a table saw just mean that rather than losing a finger, you lose your life when the whole of your lower arm is ripped off...</p><p>gloves will work for a bandsaw given the nature of the blade and the size of the teeth, butchers use them.  but with a table saw you're just looking for death.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>gloves and a table saw just mean that rather than losing a finger , you lose your life when the whole of your lower arm is ripped off...gloves will work for a bandsaw given the nature of the blade and the size of the teeth , butchers use them .
but with a table saw you 're just looking for death .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gloves and a table saw just mean that rather than losing a finger, you lose your life when the whole of your lower arm is ripped off...gloves will work for a bandsaw given the nature of the blade and the size of the teeth, butchers use them.
but with a table saw you're just looking for death.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544414</id>
	<title>"Saw Stop" Technology to halt healthcare reform</title>
	<author>drizato</author>
	<datestamp>1268995860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>In the interest of reducing healthcare costs, Congress will postpone the passing of the healthcare reform bill so that it can be amended to include provisions that require all table saws (both new and existing) be equipped with "Saw Stop" technology.  Due to the jobs created by this mandate, a "Saw Stop" subsidy will be created to cover the cost of retro-fit kits to bring existing table saws into compliance for owners of table saws that can not afford the mandated table saw safety enhancement.  This "Saw Stop" subsidy will be part of the ever increasing economic stimulus plan.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the interest of reducing healthcare costs , Congress will postpone the passing of the healthcare reform bill so that it can be amended to include provisions that require all table saws ( both new and existing ) be equipped with " Saw Stop " technology .
Due to the jobs created by this mandate , a " Saw Stop " subsidy will be created to cover the cost of retro-fit kits to bring existing table saws into compliance for owners of table saws that can not afford the mandated table saw safety enhancement .
This " Saw Stop " subsidy will be part of the ever increasing economic stimulus plan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the interest of reducing healthcare costs, Congress will postpone the passing of the healthcare reform bill so that it can be amended to include provisions that require all table saws (both new and existing) be equipped with "Saw Stop" technology.
Due to the jobs created by this mandate, a "Saw Stop" subsidy will be created to cover the cost of retro-fit kits to bring existing table saws into compliance for owners of table saws that can not afford the mandated table saw safety enhancement.
This "Saw Stop" subsidy will be part of the ever increasing economic stimulus plan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806</id>
	<title>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a pa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a patent thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544380</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>ejdmoo</author>
	<datestamp>1268995680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah, but it is a patent thing, because the guy who invented the saw is a former patent lawyer.<blockquote><div><p>Stephen Gass, an Oregon native, invented the SawStop's flesh-detecting saw brake in his barn. Gass left his career as a patent lawyer to try to license the device to tool manufacturers, who turned him away. Gass went into business, designing and selling his own saws, which have set a new standard for safety in the industry.</p></div>
</blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , but it is a patent thing , because the guy who invented the saw is a former patent lawyer.Stephen Gass , an Oregon native , invented the SawStop 's flesh-detecting saw brake in his barn .
Gass left his career as a patent lawyer to try to license the device to tool manufacturers , who turned him away .
Gass went into business , designing and selling his own saws , which have set a new standard for safety in the industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, but it is a patent thing, because the guy who invented the saw is a former patent lawyer.Stephen Gass, an Oregon native, invented the SawStop's flesh-detecting saw brake in his barn.
Gass left his career as a patent lawyer to try to license the device to tool manufacturers, who turned him away.
Gass went into business, designing and selling his own saws, which have set a new standard for safety in the industry.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548350</id>
	<title>Once again responsibility....</title>
	<author>Phil\_at\_EvilNET</author>
	<datestamp>1269083460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...takes second chair to liability. We award people that lack common sense with finanacial gain.</p><p>Put a hot cup of coffee between your legs and get burned? Cash!<br>Pump a tankful of gas and light a cigarette while wearing the gloves you spilled some gas on? Voila! CASH!<br>Cut your thumb off because you weren't paying attention to the rapidly spinning blade on the table? MORE CASH!</p><p>No one take responsibility for their stupidity or recklessness anymore. So next time I'm swinging a hammer and I bust my thumb open, I guess I'll have to find me a lawyer that can get me a few bucks for my pain and suffering.</p><p>SUCK IT UP LOSERS. Take some responsibility for your own stupidity!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...takes second chair to liability .
We award people that lack common sense with finanacial gain.Put a hot cup of coffee between your legs and get burned ?
Cash ! Pump a tankful of gas and light a cigarette while wearing the gloves you spilled some gas on ?
Voila ! CASH ! Cut your thumb off because you were n't paying attention to the rapidly spinning blade on the table ?
MORE CASH ! No one take responsibility for their stupidity or recklessness anymore .
So next time I 'm swinging a hammer and I bust my thumb open , I guess I 'll have to find me a lawyer that can get me a few bucks for my pain and suffering.SUCK IT UP LOSERS .
Take some responsibility for your own stupidity ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...takes second chair to liability.
We award people that lack common sense with finanacial gain.Put a hot cup of coffee between your legs and get burned?
Cash!Pump a tankful of gas and light a cigarette while wearing the gloves you spilled some gas on?
Voila! CASH!Cut your thumb off because you weren't paying attention to the rapidly spinning blade on the table?
MORE CASH!No one take responsibility for their stupidity or recklessness anymore.
So next time I'm swinging a hammer and I bust my thumb open, I guess I'll have to find me a lawyer that can get me a few bucks for my pain and suffering.SUCK IT UP LOSERS.
Take some responsibility for your own stupidity!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544496</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>quantaman</author>
	<datestamp>1268996220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...that should be the title. Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident. The airbag is patented.</p><p> <a href="http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/" title="patents.com">http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/</a> [patents.com] </p><p>If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents. They sold a product without standard safety features. It has nothing to do with a patent.</p></div><p>From the article</p><p><i>Then, suddenly, the hubbub fell silent. In 2002, Ryobi, which initially signed a contract with SawStop, pulled out. Manufacturers, interested at first, refused to license their device.</i></p><p><i>Gass remembered they told him, "Safety doesn't sell." So, the trio decided to design their own line of saws, raising about $3 million from friends, family members and strangers.</i></p><p>The only company using this "standard safety feature" is the company that the inventor started.</p><p>As for the cost</p><p><i>SawStop asks for licensing fees of 3 percent of the saw's wholesale price to start. As the device becomes more widespread, the fees could increase to 8 percent. The price of table saws range from $200 to several thousand dollars.</i></p><p>If I was buying a saw I'd probably pay an extra \%3 for this feature, but then again I'm not buying a saw.</p><p>What obligations do manufactures have to include safety devices that are an economic loss?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...that should be the title .
Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident .
The airbag is patented .
http : //www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/ [ patents.com ] If a car company manufactures an automobile , and there is a production error , and the airbags are n't installed , they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents .
They sold a product without standard safety features .
It has nothing to do with a patent.From the articleThen , suddenly , the hubbub fell silent .
In 2002 , Ryobi , which initially signed a contract with SawStop , pulled out .
Manufacturers , interested at first , refused to license their device.Gass remembered they told him , " Safety does n't sell .
" So , the trio decided to design their own line of saws , raising about $ 3 million from friends , family members and strangers.The only company using this " standard safety feature " is the company that the inventor started.As for the costSawStop asks for licensing fees of 3 percent of the saw 's wholesale price to start .
As the device becomes more widespread , the fees could increase to 8 percent .
The price of table saws range from $ 200 to several thousand dollars.If I was buying a saw I 'd probably pay an extra \ % 3 for this feature , but then again I 'm not buying a saw.What obligations do manufactures have to include safety devices that are an economic loss ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...that should be the title.
Take the airbag that deploys in a car to help prevent death or serious injury in an automobile accident.
The airbag is patented.
http://www.patents.com/Airbag/US6866291/en-US/ [patents.com] If a car company manufactures an automobile, and there is a production error, and the airbags aren't installed, they will be liable for damages suffered by the owners of the car who suffer accidents.
They sold a product without standard safety features.
It has nothing to do with a patent.From the articleThen, suddenly, the hubbub fell silent.
In 2002, Ryobi, which initially signed a contract with SawStop, pulled out.
Manufacturers, interested at first, refused to license their device.Gass remembered they told him, "Safety doesn't sell.
" So, the trio decided to design their own line of saws, raising about $3 million from friends, family members and strangers.The only company using this "standard safety feature" is the company that the inventor started.As for the costSawStop asks for licensing fees of 3 percent of the saw's wholesale price to start.
As the device becomes more widespread, the fees could increase to 8 percent.
The price of table saws range from $200 to several thousand dollars.If I was buying a saw I'd probably pay an extra \%3 for this feature, but then again I'm not buying a saw.What obligations do manufactures have to include safety devices that are an economic loss?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549196</id>
	<title>Re:Not "the government"</title>
	<author>Philip\_the\_physicist</author>
	<datestamp>1269097020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The jury was foolish, or the law is foolish. The dangers of using a table saw are well documented, and so are the perfectly straightforward safety procedures. The man chose to act carelessly, and was injured in a manner which should have been perfectly predictable to any child.</p><p>Not only that, there were saws with the feature available, he chose not to buy one and to save his money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The jury was foolish , or the law is foolish .
The dangers of using a table saw are well documented , and so are the perfectly straightforward safety procedures .
The man chose to act carelessly , and was injured in a manner which should have been perfectly predictable to any child.Not only that , there were saws with the feature available , he chose not to buy one and to save his money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The jury was foolish, or the law is foolish.
The dangers of using a table saw are well documented, and so are the perfectly straightforward safety procedures.
The man chose to act carelessly, and was injured in a manner which should have been perfectly predictable to any child.Not only that, there were saws with the feature available, he chose not to buy one and to save his money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543950</id>
	<title>Not entirely sure about the IP IS DEH EVILS Tone</title>
	<author>gront</author>
	<datestamp>1268993880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is the argument:<p>1. You shouldn't have to license a patent even if it lowers chance of an injury by 50\%</p><p>2. If you have to license a patent to add the injury prevention widget, such a license should be compulsory.</p><p>3. You shouldn't be able to patent things that prevent injury</p><p>Seriously, folks, we live in an IP based world, and if someone makes an invention that makes a product significantly more safe, and the manufacturer knows about the patent, knows that their product is unsafe without the patent, and decides to sell the product anyway, why is it OMFG!ZMOG!EVILSBROKENJURYOUTOFCONTROL that the company is found liable for an injury?</p><p>From the article link:</p><p>According to the Journal of Trauma, an estimated 565,670 table-saw-related injuries were treated from 1990 to 2007 in U.S. emergency rooms. The vast majority involved a hand coming in contact with the blade, and about 10 percent ended in amputation. </p><p>Thats a lot of sawed hands.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the argument : 1 .
You should n't have to license a patent even if it lowers chance of an injury by 50 \ % 2 .
If you have to license a patent to add the injury prevention widget , such a license should be compulsory.3 .
You should n't be able to patent things that prevent injurySeriously , folks , we live in an IP based world , and if someone makes an invention that makes a product significantly more safe , and the manufacturer knows about the patent , knows that their product is unsafe without the patent , and decides to sell the product anyway , why is it OMFG ! ZMOG ! EVILSBROKENJURYOUTOFCONTROL that the company is found liable for an injury ? From the article link : According to the Journal of Trauma , an estimated 565,670 table-saw-related injuries were treated from 1990 to 2007 in U.S. emergency rooms .
The vast majority involved a hand coming in contact with the blade , and about 10 percent ended in amputation .
Thats a lot of sawed hands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the argument:1.
You shouldn't have to license a patent even if it lowers chance of an injury by 50\%2.
If you have to license a patent to add the injury prevention widget, such a license should be compulsory.3.
You shouldn't be able to patent things that prevent injurySeriously, folks, we live in an IP based world, and if someone makes an invention that makes a product significantly more safe, and the manufacturer knows about the patent, knows that their product is unsafe without the patent, and decides to sell the product anyway, why is it OMFG!ZMOG!EVILSBROKENJURYOUTOFCONTROL that the company is found liable for an injury?From the article link:According to the Journal of Trauma, an estimated 565,670 table-saw-related injuries were treated from 1990 to 2007 in U.S. emergency rooms.
The vast majority involved a hand coming in contact with the blade, and about 10 percent ended in amputation.
Thats a lot of sawed hands.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544586</id>
	<title>This is ridiculous</title>
	<author>MattskEE</author>
	<datestamp>1268996520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a consumer product safety standard and Ryobi shouldn't be held liable for making table saws the same way they've been made for decades.  If the customer wanted a more expensive saw with which was safer he should have bought one.  Instead he bought a Ryobi saw but apparently he has buyer's remorse since he is suing them for selling exactly what he wanted to buy.</p><p>This system apparently adds ~$150 to the purchase price of the saw, plus $170 every time it triggers (new brake and new blade), so it's hardly a foregone conclusion that all saws should have it, given that most people never injure themselves on their power tools.  To be fair a table saw is often regarded as the most dangerous common power tool, but that's why you always treat it very carefully and follow certain safety rules like using a "push stick" instead of putting your hand near the blade.  It's a lot like using a vertical bandsaw.</p><p>If you read the article you see that the lawyer who filed this suit was hired by the user's health insurance company.  So that's the real story: the health insurance company doesn't want to pay for people injuring themselves with power tools.  So the user gets a settlement, the health insurance probably gets a portion of it, and the lawyer definitely gets a portion of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a consumer product safety standard and Ryobi should n't be held liable for making table saws the same way they 've been made for decades .
If the customer wanted a more expensive saw with which was safer he should have bought one .
Instead he bought a Ryobi saw but apparently he has buyer 's remorse since he is suing them for selling exactly what he wanted to buy.This system apparently adds ~ $ 150 to the purchase price of the saw , plus $ 170 every time it triggers ( new brake and new blade ) , so it 's hardly a foregone conclusion that all saws should have it , given that most people never injure themselves on their power tools .
To be fair a table saw is often regarded as the most dangerous common power tool , but that 's why you always treat it very carefully and follow certain safety rules like using a " push stick " instead of putting your hand near the blade .
It 's a lot like using a vertical bandsaw.If you read the article you see that the lawyer who filed this suit was hired by the user 's health insurance company .
So that 's the real story : the health insurance company does n't want to pay for people injuring themselves with power tools .
So the user gets a settlement , the health insurance probably gets a portion of it , and the lawyer definitely gets a portion of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a consumer product safety standard and Ryobi shouldn't be held liable for making table saws the same way they've been made for decades.
If the customer wanted a more expensive saw with which was safer he should have bought one.
Instead he bought a Ryobi saw but apparently he has buyer's remorse since he is suing them for selling exactly what he wanted to buy.This system apparently adds ~$150 to the purchase price of the saw, plus $170 every time it triggers (new brake and new blade), so it's hardly a foregone conclusion that all saws should have it, given that most people never injure themselves on their power tools.
To be fair a table saw is often regarded as the most dangerous common power tool, but that's why you always treat it very carefully and follow certain safety rules like using a "push stick" instead of putting your hand near the blade.
It's a lot like using a vertical bandsaw.If you read the article you see that the lawyer who filed this suit was hired by the user's health insurance company.
So that's the real story: the health insurance company doesn't want to pay for people injuring themselves with power tools.
So the user gets a settlement, the health insurance probably gets a portion of it, and the lawyer definitely gets a portion of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544220</id>
	<title>Reality check!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article...</p><blockquote><div><p>But saw manufacturers have countered that SawStop's technology is "unproven" and "speculative." They've accused SawStop of pushing its technology for <b>its own financial gain</b>.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
What!?<br>
<br>
That's exactly what a company does! It's a company, not a charity!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article...But saw manufacturers have countered that SawStop 's technology is " unproven " and " speculative .
" They 've accused SawStop of pushing its technology for its own financial gain .
What ! ? That 's exactly what a company does !
It 's a company , not a charity !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article...But saw manufacturers have countered that SawStop's technology is "unproven" and "speculative.
" They've accused SawStop of pushing its technology for its own financial gain.
What!?

That's exactly what a company does!
It's a company, not a charity!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546750</id>
	<title>Re:sue everyone</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1269012480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can I sue everyone who failed to make their house payments for the reduced value of my house?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I sue everyone who failed to make their house payments for the reduced value of my house ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I sue everyone who failed to make their house payments for the reduced value of my house?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547530</id>
	<title>Isn't it pretty obvious</title>
	<author>Zomalaja</author>
	<datestamp>1269023700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this is anything like the small Ryobi saw I have, you must assemble it before using. The Manual has countless warnings about using the tool safely, you get to hold the blade in your hands and see the sharp nasty teeth, surely it is obvious that this equipment can hurt you. Once it is assembled and it is turned on, the sound it makes is obviously a sound that should alert you again that you better respect this tool. There is a standing rule here at my house, if you need me or there is a phone call for me or whatever, if the saw is running, do not even open the door to the garage until the saw is off. Same thing applies to routers and many other tools. It's not very difficult to use a table saw safely but it is a tiny bit less efficient ASSUMING you dont mangle a body part. I see contractors with those saws with no blade guard or kickback pawls and just shake my head, the same guys that disable the blade guard on their Skilsaws.

What if all saws are mandated to use saw stop and someone bypasses it electrically and then gets hurt ? Sue saw stop for making their technology bypassable ? This is absurd........</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is anything like the small Ryobi saw I have , you must assemble it before using .
The Manual has countless warnings about using the tool safely , you get to hold the blade in your hands and see the sharp nasty teeth , surely it is obvious that this equipment can hurt you .
Once it is assembled and it is turned on , the sound it makes is obviously a sound that should alert you again that you better respect this tool .
There is a standing rule here at my house , if you need me or there is a phone call for me or whatever , if the saw is running , do not even open the door to the garage until the saw is off .
Same thing applies to routers and many other tools .
It 's not very difficult to use a table saw safely but it is a tiny bit less efficient ASSUMING you dont mangle a body part .
I see contractors with those saws with no blade guard or kickback pawls and just shake my head , the same guys that disable the blade guard on their Skilsaws .
What if all saws are mandated to use saw stop and someone bypasses it electrically and then gets hurt ?
Sue saw stop for making their technology bypassable ?
This is absurd....... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is anything like the small Ryobi saw I have, you must assemble it before using.
The Manual has countless warnings about using the tool safely, you get to hold the blade in your hands and see the sharp nasty teeth, surely it is obvious that this equipment can hurt you.
Once it is assembled and it is turned on, the sound it makes is obviously a sound that should alert you again that you better respect this tool.
There is a standing rule here at my house, if you need me or there is a phone call for me or whatever, if the saw is running, do not even open the door to the garage until the saw is off.
Same thing applies to routers and many other tools.
It's not very difficult to use a table saw safely but it is a tiny bit less efficient ASSUMING you dont mangle a body part.
I see contractors with those saws with no blade guard or kickback pawls and just shake my head, the same guys that disable the blade guard on their Skilsaws.
What if all saws are mandated to use saw stop and someone bypasses it electrically and then gets hurt ?
Sue saw stop for making their technology bypassable ?
This is absurd........</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548464</id>
	<title>Re:Not again...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269085980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Case possible only in the U.S.</p><p>No technoloqy will prevent the stupidity of user. Like this mentioned SawStop won't prevent you standing behind the blade, one nail or hard branch spot is enough to do some harm.</p><p>I've seen some accidents with table saws, among with other power- and powerless tools. Once I just was telling a guy not to lean over spinning table saw blade. Only after two minutes door opened behind, this guy turned around to and "by accident" swing his arm into blade. Luckily he got only 5cm wound, no cut tendons and no lost fingers. Really it was no real accident, rather it was lack of taking proper precautions. One dump ass tried fixing broken lead of a vacuum cleaner, refusing to follow clear order to bring any faulty equipment to electrician. Just "by accident" he mixed earth and phase wires, it's just another lucky one that survived without a single shock. Too many guys insist working without respirator mask and suffer lung problems within few years, even when given best equipment and instructions to use them. This list is endless...</p><p>I would say that almost every accident is because lack of common sense. Like this winter we had a lot of snow and a lot of falling accidents, because of people cleaning their roofs and falling off. If' you're about to climb on steep roof, use that harness! Is is that difficult? If using tablesaw, stand aside ot the blade, no leaning over and never ever put your fingers near to spinning blade! It's a 3000rpm f*ing finger ripping machine, not a cheese grater! If you're dumb enough, you can hurt yourself event with a cheese grater (I've even seen that). And if you did, it was just right for you.</p><p>My only advice here is if you don't know how to use a tool then don't use it, ask and learn first! If you're dumb enough not to follow this one and only rule, that was really your own fault. On contruction site I really prefer intelligent trained people, proper safety training and simple heavy duty tools with less breakable parts, rather than bunch of idiots trying to cut their fingers without full time supervision. It's about people using these tools, not just about some hype-technology. Will these "protecting" dumbasses ever learn?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Case possible only in the U.S.No technoloqy will prevent the stupidity of user .
Like this mentioned SawStop wo n't prevent you standing behind the blade , one nail or hard branch spot is enough to do some harm.I 've seen some accidents with table saws , among with other power- and powerless tools .
Once I just was telling a guy not to lean over spinning table saw blade .
Only after two minutes door opened behind , this guy turned around to and " by accident " swing his arm into blade .
Luckily he got only 5cm wound , no cut tendons and no lost fingers .
Really it was no real accident , rather it was lack of taking proper precautions .
One dump ass tried fixing broken lead of a vacuum cleaner , refusing to follow clear order to bring any faulty equipment to electrician .
Just " by accident " he mixed earth and phase wires , it 's just another lucky one that survived without a single shock .
Too many guys insist working without respirator mask and suffer lung problems within few years , even when given best equipment and instructions to use them .
This list is endless...I would say that almost every accident is because lack of common sense .
Like this winter we had a lot of snow and a lot of falling accidents , because of people cleaning their roofs and falling off .
If ' you 're about to climb on steep roof , use that harness !
Is is that difficult ?
If using tablesaw , stand aside ot the blade , no leaning over and never ever put your fingers near to spinning blade !
It 's a 3000rpm f * ing finger ripping machine , not a cheese grater !
If you 're dumb enough , you can hurt yourself event with a cheese grater ( I 've even seen that ) .
And if you did , it was just right for you.My only advice here is if you do n't know how to use a tool then do n't use it , ask and learn first !
If you 're dumb enough not to follow this one and only rule , that was really your own fault .
On contruction site I really prefer intelligent trained people , proper safety training and simple heavy duty tools with less breakable parts , rather than bunch of idiots trying to cut their fingers without full time supervision .
It 's about people using these tools , not just about some hype-technology .
Will these " protecting " dumbasses ever learn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Case possible only in the U.S.No technoloqy will prevent the stupidity of user.
Like this mentioned SawStop won't prevent you standing behind the blade, one nail or hard branch spot is enough to do some harm.I've seen some accidents with table saws, among with other power- and powerless tools.
Once I just was telling a guy not to lean over spinning table saw blade.
Only after two minutes door opened behind, this guy turned around to and "by accident" swing his arm into blade.
Luckily he got only 5cm wound, no cut tendons and no lost fingers.
Really it was no real accident, rather it was lack of taking proper precautions.
One dump ass tried fixing broken lead of a vacuum cleaner, refusing to follow clear order to bring any faulty equipment to electrician.
Just "by accident" he mixed earth and phase wires, it's just another lucky one that survived without a single shock.
Too many guys insist working without respirator mask and suffer lung problems within few years, even when given best equipment and instructions to use them.
This list is endless...I would say that almost every accident is because lack of common sense.
Like this winter we had a lot of snow and a lot of falling accidents, because of people cleaning their roofs and falling off.
If' you're about to climb on steep roof, use that harness!
Is is that difficult?
If using tablesaw, stand aside ot the blade, no leaning over and never ever put your fingers near to spinning blade!
It's a 3000rpm f*ing finger ripping machine, not a cheese grater!
If you're dumb enough, you can hurt yourself event with a cheese grater (I've even seen that).
And if you did, it was just right for you.My only advice here is if you don't know how to use a tool then don't use it, ask and learn first!
If you're dumb enough not to follow this one and only rule, that was really your own fault.
On contruction site I really prefer intelligent trained people, proper safety training and simple heavy duty tools with less breakable parts, rather than bunch of idiots trying to cut their fingers without full time supervision.
It's about people using these tools, not just about some hype-technology.
Will these "protecting" dumbasses ever learn?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547920</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269116160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.</p></div><p>You mean they grow back?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard 's tail of the human body.You mean they grow back ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.You mean they grow back?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544108</id>
	<title>Re:Not a "government" requirement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; found that the plaintiff had a good argument</p><p>It seems to me that the jury don't care about the argument, they think 'how much money would \_I\_ want if my hand was cut off'.</p><p>&gt; doesn't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demands</p><p>The patent holder has no obligation to offer licences and may prevent it being used unlicenced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; found that the plaintiff had a good argumentIt seems to me that the jury do n't care about the argument , they think 'how much money would \ _I \ _ want if my hand was cut off'. &gt; does n't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demandsThe patent holder has no obligation to offer licences and may prevent it being used unlicenced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; found that the plaintiff had a good argumentIt seems to me that the jury don't care about the argument, they think 'how much money would \_I\_ want if my hand was cut off'.&gt; doesn't men they must license it at whatever price the patent holder demandsThe patent holder has no obligation to offer licences and may prevent it being used unlicenced.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544592</id>
	<title>The solution is to outlaw patent trolls</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1268996580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary:  "If the decision stands, not only will the price of table saws go way up, but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye."</p><p>Indeed - and it's the predatory gleam in Gass's eye that probably stopped Ryobi and other sawmakers from using his technology.  He was demanding a royalty of up to 8\% of the gross wholesale price of the saw, per saw sold.</p><p>And let's keep in mind that serious table saw accidents requiring emergency room treatment are actually pretty rare (31,000 per annum with something over five million table saws in use in the US).  Further - 72\% of table saw accidents are caused by kickback, when the workpiece binds with the saw blade and is kicked away from it (with tremendous force and right back at the user), which the SawStop device does nothing to prevent.  (Kickback accidents should soon start to decline, as saws sold in the US are now required to have riving knives installed which will prevent some of the common causes of kickback.)</p><p>Disclaimer:  I am a hobbyist woodworker and have been following the issue in various professional and semi professional woodworking blogs and in woodworking forums.  The numbers in the paragraph above come from <i>Popular Woodworking</i>'s Editors Blog.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : " If the decision stands , not only will the price of table saws go way up , but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye .
" Indeed - and it 's the predatory gleam in Gass 's eye that probably stopped Ryobi and other sawmakers from using his technology .
He was demanding a royalty of up to 8 \ % of the gross wholesale price of the saw , per saw sold.And let 's keep in mind that serious table saw accidents requiring emergency room treatment are actually pretty rare ( 31,000 per annum with something over five million table saws in use in the US ) .
Further - 72 \ % of table saw accidents are caused by kickback , when the workpiece binds with the saw blade and is kicked away from it ( with tremendous force and right back at the user ) , which the SawStop device does nothing to prevent .
( Kickback accidents should soon start to decline , as saws sold in the US are now required to have riving knives installed which will prevent some of the common causes of kickback .
) Disclaimer : I am a hobbyist woodworker and have been following the issue in various professional and semi professional woodworking blogs and in woodworking forums .
The numbers in the paragraph above come from Popular Woodworking 's Editors Blog .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary:  "If the decision stands, not only will the price of table saws go way up, but other hungry patent-holders will probably get a gleam in their eye.
"Indeed - and it's the predatory gleam in Gass's eye that probably stopped Ryobi and other sawmakers from using his technology.
He was demanding a royalty of up to 8\% of the gross wholesale price of the saw, per saw sold.And let's keep in mind that serious table saw accidents requiring emergency room treatment are actually pretty rare (31,000 per annum with something over five million table saws in use in the US).
Further - 72\% of table saw accidents are caused by kickback, when the workpiece binds with the saw blade and is kicked away from it (with tremendous force and right back at the user), which the SawStop device does nothing to prevent.
(Kickback accidents should soon start to decline, as saws sold in the US are now required to have riving knives installed which will prevent some of the common causes of kickback.
)Disclaimer:  I am a hobbyist woodworker and have been following the issue in various professional and semi professional woodworking blogs and in woodworking forums.
The numbers in the paragraph above come from Popular Woodworking's Editors Blog.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902</id>
	<title>Mandatory safety enhancements</title>
	<author>RobertB-DC</author>
	<datestamp>1268993700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder, at what point does a feature that saves lives, limbs, or fingers go from "nice to have" to mandatory?  Seat belts, for example -- once they were an option, now you have to have them and *use* them.</p><p>I often hear the ads for GM's OnStar, where someone is in a crash and the OnStar response saves their life or that of someone in the other car.  They tout some large number of OnStar crash activations as a reason to buy a GM car.  But if it's such a critical safety feature -- if nobody in their right mind would consider buying a vehicle *without* OnStar -- then shouldn't it be mandatory on *all* vehicles?</p><p>Where *do* we draw a line between "buy this to save your life, if you want to" and "buy this to save your life, you're required to"?  I'm sure there's strong arguments on both sides... the issue of licensing patented maim-prevention systems is just part of the debate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder , at what point does a feature that saves lives , limbs , or fingers go from " nice to have " to mandatory ?
Seat belts , for example -- once they were an option , now you have to have them and * use * them.I often hear the ads for GM 's OnStar , where someone is in a crash and the OnStar response saves their life or that of someone in the other car .
They tout some large number of OnStar crash activations as a reason to buy a GM car .
But if it 's such a critical safety feature -- if nobody in their right mind would consider buying a vehicle * without * OnStar -- then should n't it be mandatory on * all * vehicles ? Where * do * we draw a line between " buy this to save your life , if you want to " and " buy this to save your life , you 're required to " ?
I 'm sure there 's strong arguments on both sides... the issue of licensing patented maim-prevention systems is just part of the debate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder, at what point does a feature that saves lives, limbs, or fingers go from "nice to have" to mandatory?
Seat belts, for example -- once they were an option, now you have to have them and *use* them.I often hear the ads for GM's OnStar, where someone is in a crash and the OnStar response saves their life or that of someone in the other car.
They tout some large number of OnStar crash activations as a reason to buy a GM car.
But if it's such a critical safety feature -- if nobody in their right mind would consider buying a vehicle *without* OnStar -- then shouldn't it be mandatory on *all* vehicles?Where *do* we draw a line between "buy this to save your life, if you want to" and "buy this to save your life, you're required to"?
I'm sure there's strong arguments on both sides... the issue of licensing patented maim-prevention systems is just part of the debate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544990</id>
	<title>Kind of out the door right now but...</title>
	<author>phexx</author>
	<datestamp>1268998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wanted to mention something else that may be of significance in this. I wouldn't doubt that there are many patent holders out there who are paid by companies to keep their patents from being used.

Would those companies be liable and could the patent holder be held for criminal intent to increase planned obsolescence? Is personal health and safety the only concern of these new patent reverse-infringements or could it be used in other  ways.

Oh, and speaking of said possibility, anyone know the history of the Sony AccuCore Technology? (No, really, I want more info.) Scratch resistant polymers could have saved a good number of my CDs from getting torn up over the years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wanted to mention something else that may be of significance in this .
I would n't doubt that there are many patent holders out there who are paid by companies to keep their patents from being used .
Would those companies be liable and could the patent holder be held for criminal intent to increase planned obsolescence ?
Is personal health and safety the only concern of these new patent reverse-infringements or could it be used in other ways .
Oh , and speaking of said possibility , anyone know the history of the Sony AccuCore Technology ?
( No , really , I want more info .
) Scratch resistant polymers could have saved a good number of my CDs from getting torn up over the years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wanted to mention something else that may be of significance in this.
I wouldn't doubt that there are many patent holders out there who are paid by companies to keep their patents from being used.
Would those companies be liable and could the patent holder be held for criminal intent to increase planned obsolescence?
Is personal health and safety the only concern of these new patent reverse-infringements or could it be used in other  ways.
Oh, and speaking of said possibility, anyone know the history of the Sony AccuCore Technology?
(No, really, I want more info.
) Scratch resistant polymers could have saved a good number of my CDs from getting torn up over the years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545844</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>silas\_moeckel</author>
	<datestamp>1269003660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a table saw, this idiot didn't use it properly so he lost a finger.  I grew up in a cabinet shop there were no guards, safety devices etc on anything are we all had all of our original digits.  At no time while using a table saw would your hands be anywhere near the blade., is using a scrap piece of wood to push with that hard? The most dangerous saw was the skill saw but again very few accidents and they were to mostly thin out the shallow end of the gene pool.</p><p>Foss is nice tech is nice but you don't need idiot proof tools you need to train idiots not to hurt themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a table saw , this idiot did n't use it properly so he lost a finger .
I grew up in a cabinet shop there were no guards , safety devices etc on anything are we all had all of our original digits .
At no time while using a table saw would your hands be anywhere near the blade. , is using a scrap piece of wood to push with that hard ?
The most dangerous saw was the skill saw but again very few accidents and they were to mostly thin out the shallow end of the gene pool.Foss is nice tech is nice but you do n't need idiot proof tools you need to train idiots not to hurt themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a table saw, this idiot didn't use it properly so he lost a finger.
I grew up in a cabinet shop there were no guards, safety devices etc on anything are we all had all of our original digits.
At no time while using a table saw would your hands be anywhere near the blade., is using a scrap piece of wood to push with that hard?
The most dangerous saw was the skill saw but again very few accidents and they were to mostly thin out the shallow end of the gene pool.Foss is nice tech is nice but you don't need idiot proof tools you need to train idiots not to hurt themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544670</id>
	<title>Sawstop expense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268996940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sawstop's system is nice but the cheapest model is 1599.00 vs 200 or so. I know I'd like to have one but seriously there arn't many non-pro/wealthy people who can even think of affording even that saw. I've also read on some other forums that the patent holder is himself a lawyer and alledgedly  been lobbying and testifying in just such cases that all saws should have his patented tech<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. that seems to me to be just a TINY bit of conflict of interest there. Not to mention that the design of the saw stop model and swing arm would tend to prevent it from being used on competitors saws without major mods. If this sort of crap build precedent then you can forget about being able to buy reasonably priced power tools period because I also read that the system could be used on band saws, chop saws etc which would be a matter of time before it was universally required<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...  Those of practices make me sick<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. If you use a table saw properly with feather boards, push sticks guards etc the risk can largely be mitigated. Heres a cool vid though of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sawstop 's system is nice but the cheapest model is 1599.00 vs 200 or so .
I know I 'd like to have one but seriously there ar n't many non-pro/wealthy people who can even think of affording even that saw .
I 've also read on some other forums that the patent holder is himself a lawyer and alledgedly been lobbying and testifying in just such cases that all saws should have his patented tech .. that seems to me to be just a TINY bit of conflict of interest there .
Not to mention that the design of the saw stop model and swing arm would tend to prevent it from being used on competitors saws without major mods .
If this sort of crap build precedent then you can forget about being able to buy reasonably priced power tools period because I also read that the system could be used on band saws , chop saws etc which would be a matter of time before it was universally required ... Those of practices make me sick .. If you use a table saw properly with feather boards , push sticks guards etc the risk can largely be mitigated .
Heres a cool vid though of it http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = E3mzhvMgrLE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sawstop's system is nice but the cheapest model is 1599.00 vs 200 or so.
I know I'd like to have one but seriously there arn't many non-pro/wealthy people who can even think of affording even that saw.
I've also read on some other forums that the patent holder is himself a lawyer and alledgedly  been lobbying and testifying in just such cases that all saws should have his patented tech .. that seems to me to be just a TINY bit of conflict of interest there.
Not to mention that the design of the saw stop model and swing arm would tend to prevent it from being used on competitors saws without major mods.
If this sort of crap build precedent then you can forget about being able to buy reasonably priced power tools period because I also read that the system could be used on band saws, chop saws etc which would be a matter of time before it was universally required ...  Those of practices make me sick .. If you use a table saw properly with feather boards, push sticks guards etc the risk can largely be mitigated.
Heres a cool vid though of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544082</id>
	<title>Re:Mandatory safety enhancements</title>
	<author>John Napkintosh</author>
	<datestamp>1268994300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Those fat-cat automobile CEOs KNEW that a [lane departure|radar-equipped automatic braking|drowsiness detection] system would have prevented my serious injury, but they didn't put one in my car. I think I might have a case!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Those fat-cat automobile CEOs KNEW that a [ lane departure | radar-equipped automatic braking | drowsiness detection ] system would have prevented my serious injury , but they did n't put one in my car .
I think I might have a case !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Those fat-cat automobile CEOs KNEW that a [lane departure|radar-equipped automatic braking|drowsiness detection] system would have prevented my serious injury, but they didn't put one in my car.
I think I might have a case!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31570742</id>
	<title>We've seen rulings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269279540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is one thing when you sue someone for not using industry-standard safety, but when you hurt yourself you can't really blame them for not using cutting-edge/not-yet-on-the-market/unproven(but well hyped) technology.</p><p>This ruling will not stand.  Every industry in the world sees the problem, and will fight it.  They don't want to be forced to always be buying whatever scam-of-the-week safety device is on the market.  They can not be liable for not converting to unproven technology, even if it were free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is one thing when you sue someone for not using industry-standard safety , but when you hurt yourself you ca n't really blame them for not using cutting-edge/not-yet-on-the-market/unproven ( but well hyped ) technology.This ruling will not stand .
Every industry in the world sees the problem , and will fight it .
They do n't want to be forced to always be buying whatever scam-of-the-week safety device is on the market .
They can not be liable for not converting to unproven technology , even if it were free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is one thing when you sue someone for not using industry-standard safety, but when you hurt yourself you can't really blame them for not using cutting-edge/not-yet-on-the-market/unproven(but well hyped) technology.This ruling will not stand.
Every industry in the world sees the problem, and will fight it.
They don't want to be forced to always be buying whatever scam-of-the-week safety device is on the market.
They can not be liable for not converting to unproven technology, even if it were free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546380</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1269008280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some tools are inherently dangerous as a direct consequence of their function. Cutty tools cut, weldy tools get hot, drilly tools make holes, angle grinders will gut you like a fish if you misuse them, and acetylene explosions can level a building.</p><p>The solution isn't to punish the competent user by complicating their tools and equipment and making them pay for the idiots.</p><p>Note to amateur and professional carpenters:</p><p>Keep your dick skinners out of the damn blade. If you get cut, accept it was because you were complacent and stupid, and consider your injuries part of the price.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some tools are inherently dangerous as a direct consequence of their function .
Cutty tools cut , weldy tools get hot , drilly tools make holes , angle grinders will gut you like a fish if you misuse them , and acetylene explosions can level a building.The solution is n't to punish the competent user by complicating their tools and equipment and making them pay for the idiots.Note to amateur and professional carpenters : Keep your dick skinners out of the damn blade .
If you get cut , accept it was because you were complacent and stupid , and consider your injuries part of the price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some tools are inherently dangerous as a direct consequence of their function.
Cutty tools cut, weldy tools get hot, drilly tools make holes, angle grinders will gut you like a fish if you misuse them, and acetylene explosions can level a building.The solution isn't to punish the competent user by complicating their tools and equipment and making them pay for the idiots.Note to amateur and professional carpenters:Keep your dick skinners out of the damn blade.
If you get cut, accept it was because you were complacent and stupid, and consider your injuries part of the price.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544100</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268994480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is bullshit, SawStop is not a "standard safety device."  99\% of the table saws on the market do not have an equivalent safety mechanism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is bullshit , SawStop is not a " standard safety device .
" 99 \ % of the table saws on the market do not have an equivalent safety mechanism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is bullshit, SawStop is not a "standard safety device.
"  99\% of the table saws on the market do not have an equivalent safety mechanism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543840</id>
	<title>Oh the irony.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ultimate irony...<br>Many companies did not embrace this tech. and put it on their saws for the sole reason they were afraid they'd be sued just in case the saw didn't stop fast enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ultimate irony...Many companies did not embrace this tech .
and put it on their saws for the sole reason they were afraid they 'd be sued just in case the saw did n't stop fast enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ultimate irony...Many companies did not embrace this tech.
and put it on their saws for the sole reason they were afraid they'd be sued just in case the saw didn't stop fast enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544372</id>
	<title>Someone submit this under YRO please:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting news:<br><a href="http://www.darkreading.com/vulnerability\_management/security/client/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=223200163" title="darkreading.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.darkreading.com/vulnerability\_management/security/client/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=223200163</a> [darkreading.com]</p><p>Ya gotta love this lovely tidbit of fine print from the SyncMyRide<br>terms and conditions:<br><a href="http://www.syncmyride.com/Own/Modules/PageTools/TermsAndConditions.aspx" title="syncmyride.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.syncmyride.com/Own/Modules/PageTools/TermsAndConditions.aspx</a> [syncmyride.com]</p><p>Ford's Service provider Tellme Networks, Inc. ("Tellme"), a subsidiary<br>of Microsoft Corporation, may record and retain user voice utterances<br>("recorded utterances"), which are recordings of sounds made when the<br>TDI Service is in listen state and waiting for a user command or<br>response. These recorded utterances may include all sounds in the<br>vehicle, including the voice of the user and voices of other vehicle<br>occupants, while the service is in listen state. Tellme may also, at<br>Ford's request, randomly record and assemble in sequence, all voice<br>communications made from the time the Service is connected (by the<br>user pressing the VOICE button) to the time the Service is<br>disconnected.</p><p>("Whole call recordings (WCRs)"). WCRs will include voice utterances<br>and may include any other sounds in the vehicle, including the voices<br>of the user and other vehicle occupants, during the entire time the<br>Service is connected. Both recorded utterances and WCRs may be<br>associated with you or the cell phone number assigned to the Service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting news : http : //www.darkreading.com/vulnerability \ _management/security/client/showArticle.jhtml ? articleID = 223200163 [ darkreading.com ] Ya got ta love this lovely tidbit of fine print from the SyncMyRideterms and conditions : http : //www.syncmyride.com/Own/Modules/PageTools/TermsAndConditions.aspx [ syncmyride.com ] Ford 's Service provider Tellme Networks , Inc. ( " Tellme " ) , a subsidiaryof Microsoft Corporation , may record and retain user voice utterances ( " recorded utterances " ) , which are recordings of sounds made when theTDI Service is in listen state and waiting for a user command orresponse .
These recorded utterances may include all sounds in thevehicle , including the voice of the user and voices of other vehicleoccupants , while the service is in listen state .
Tellme may also , atFord 's request , randomly record and assemble in sequence , all voicecommunications made from the time the Service is connected ( by theuser pressing the VOICE button ) to the time the Service isdisconnected .
( " Whole call recordings ( WCRs ) " ) .
WCRs will include voice utterancesand may include any other sounds in the vehicle , including the voicesof the user and other vehicle occupants , during the entire time theService is connected .
Both recorded utterances and WCRs may beassociated with you or the cell phone number assigned to the Service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting news:http://www.darkreading.com/vulnerability\_management/security/client/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=223200163 [darkreading.com]Ya gotta love this lovely tidbit of fine print from the SyncMyRideterms and conditions:http://www.syncmyride.com/Own/Modules/PageTools/TermsAndConditions.aspx [syncmyride.com]Ford's Service provider Tellme Networks, Inc. ("Tellme"), a subsidiaryof Microsoft Corporation, may record and retain user voice utterances("recorded utterances"), which are recordings of sounds made when theTDI Service is in listen state and waiting for a user command orresponse.
These recorded utterances may include all sounds in thevehicle, including the voice of the user and voices of other vehicleoccupants, while the service is in listen state.
Tellme may also, atFord's request, randomly record and assemble in sequence, all voicecommunications made from the time the Service is connected (by theuser pressing the VOICE button) to the time the Service isdisconnected.
("Whole call recordings (WCRs)").
WCRs will include voice utterancesand may include any other sounds in the vehicle, including the voicesof the user and other vehicle occupants, during the entire time theService is connected.
Both recorded utterances and WCRs may beassociated with you or the cell phone number assigned to the Service.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272</id>
	<title>Financially viable?</title>
	<author>Radical Moderate</author>
	<datestamp>1268995140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA: <i>"Osorio's legal team,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... pointed to SawStop's sales as evidence that the technology is not only mechanically feasible  but financially viable"</i> <br> <br>
SawStop's cheapest saw is $1600.  To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $169 in parts.  That alone is more than I paid for my table saw, brand new.  These a**holes are basically trying to destroy woodworking as a hobby.  Yes, saws are dangerous, that's why I'm always incredibly careful when I use one. <br> <br>
This tech is great for schools or shops where saws are used all the time, but to insist that no saw be sold without this technology is nuts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " Osorio 's legal team , ... pointed to SawStop 's sales as evidence that the technology is not only mechanically feasible but financially viable " SawStop 's cheapest saw is $ 1600 .
To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $ 169 in parts .
That alone is more than I paid for my table saw , brand new .
These a * * holes are basically trying to destroy woodworking as a hobby .
Yes , saws are dangerous , that 's why I 'm always incredibly careful when I use one .
This tech is great for schools or shops where saws are used all the time , but to insist that no saw be sold without this technology is nuts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: "Osorio's legal team, ... pointed to SawStop's sales as evidence that the technology is not only mechanically feasible  but financially viable"  
SawStop's cheapest saw is $1600.
To get the saw working again after a stoppage costs $169 in parts.
That alone is more than I paid for my table saw, brand new.
These a**holes are basically trying to destroy woodworking as a hobby.
Yes, saws are dangerous, that's why I'm always incredibly careful when I use one.
This tech is great for schools or shops where saws are used all the time, but to insist that no saw be sold without this technology is nuts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1268995260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology, and to have saved 700 fingers. That is an insane injury rate, and if correct, shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are.</p></div><p>Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology , and to have saved 700 fingers .
That is an insane injury rate , and if correct , shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are.Yeah , but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard 's tail of the human body .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Saw Stop claims to have sold 20,000 units with their proprietary brake technology, and to have saved 700 fingers.
That is an insane injury rate, and if correct, shows how inherently dangerous table saws really are.Yeah, but 680 of those fingers were probably pinkies... which are like the lizard's tail of the human body.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544338</id>
	<title>Re:Cut off his thumb?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you use a glove while using power tools or machine tools, you deserve what happens to you.</p><p>Glove are not safe, whether they are made of.</p><p>Ties, jewelry, gloves, long sleeves, etc - remove these.  Long hair? Cut it you dirty hippie.</p><p>Seriously.  I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a lathe and scar you for life.</p><p>--<br>BMO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you use a glove while using power tools or machine tools , you deserve what happens to you.Glove are not safe , whether they are made of.Ties , jewelry , gloves , long sleeves , etc - remove these .
Long hair ?
Cut it you dirty hippie.Seriously .
I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a lathe and scar you for life.--BMO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you use a glove while using power tools or machine tools, you deserve what happens to you.Glove are not safe, whether they are made of.Ties, jewelry, gloves, long sleeves, etc - remove these.
Long hair?
Cut it you dirty hippie.Seriously.
I can show you a picture of a person wrapped around a lathe and scar you for life.--BMO</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543874</id>
	<title>Not new</title>
	<author>twotailakitsune</author>
	<datestamp>1268993580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The government has in the past forced the use of patented tech. It is not new, it is just a rare case that was not done out of court.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The government has in the past forced the use of patented tech .
It is not new , it is just a rare case that was not done out of court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The government has in the past forced the use of patented tech.
It is not new, it is just a rare case that was not done out of court.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548626</id>
	<title>Ordinary saw you cut your fingers with.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269090060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Units like this are very popular at indoor construction sites, because with one machine you can do almost every wood cutting. And they are very easy to carry. And these are the machines that usually you cut fingers with. Pretty hard to implement this magical saw-stop tehnology to units like this.</p><p>http://www.werkzeug-news.de/news7/img/h-dewalt-d27112.jpg</p><p>Even SawStop had a good product, lawcases like this only give it a bad publicity!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Units like this are very popular at indoor construction sites , because with one machine you can do almost every wood cutting .
And they are very easy to carry .
And these are the machines that usually you cut fingers with .
Pretty hard to implement this magical saw-stop tehnology to units like this.http : //www.werkzeug-news.de/news7/img/h-dewalt-d27112.jpgEven SawStop had a good product , lawcases like this only give it a bad publicity !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Units like this are very popular at indoor construction sites, because with one machine you can do almost every wood cutting.
And they are very easy to carry.
And these are the machines that usually you cut fingers with.
Pretty hard to implement this magical saw-stop tehnology to units like this.http://www.werkzeug-news.de/news7/img/h-dewalt-d27112.jpgEven SawStop had a good product, lawcases like this only give it a bad publicity!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324</id>
	<title>Re:But wait!</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1268995380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Saw Stop has its limitations. It basically works the same way a touch lamp or GFCI works. You create a ground, ground is sensed, action is done. In this instance the action is shoving a block of aluminum into the saw blade.</p><p>You can't cut wood over a certain \% water because the wood will act as a ground, creating a false positive and you get to spend $70 on a sacrificial piece of aluminum and new blade.</p><p>So there are good reasons for NOT having this 'safety feature'.</p><p>All the defense lawyer has to do is prove is that this guy at any time in his life has cut wood with a high \% of water, something he could not have done on the Saw Stop.<br>(Right? Just like Law and Order?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Saw Stop has its limitations .
It basically works the same way a touch lamp or GFCI works .
You create a ground , ground is sensed , action is done .
In this instance the action is shoving a block of aluminum into the saw blade.You ca n't cut wood over a certain \ % water because the wood will act as a ground , creating a false positive and you get to spend $ 70 on a sacrificial piece of aluminum and new blade.So there are good reasons for NOT having this 'safety feature'.All the defense lawyer has to do is prove is that this guy at any time in his life has cut wood with a high \ % of water , something he could not have done on the Saw Stop. ( Right ?
Just like Law and Order ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Saw Stop has its limitations.
It basically works the same way a touch lamp or GFCI works.
You create a ground, ground is sensed, action is done.
In this instance the action is shoving a block of aluminum into the saw blade.You can't cut wood over a certain \% water because the wood will act as a ground, creating a false positive and you get to spend $70 on a sacrificial piece of aluminum and new blade.So there are good reasons for NOT having this 'safety feature'.All the defense lawyer has to do is prove is that this guy at any time in his life has cut wood with a high \% of water, something he could not have done on the Saw Stop.(Right?
Just like Law and Order?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545056</id>
	<title>Re:sounds like a safety law suit jackpot and not a</title>
	<author>silentsteel</author>
	<datestamp>1268998920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
. . . they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass . . . </p></div><p>If you are complacent enough around a table saw that your ass comes in contact with the spinning blade, you deserve what you get.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass .
. .
If you are complacent enough around a table saw that your ass comes in contact with the spinning blade , you deserve what you get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
.
. .
they become complacent about safety and that 1 in a million mistake ends up biting them in the ass .
. .
If you are complacent enough around a table saw that your ass comes in contact with the spinning blade, you deserve what you get.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544368</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31551976</id>
	<title>There is a really horrible video on the interwebs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269078780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a really horrible video on the interwebs, it shows some poor fool lopping off his thumb, while making cabinets for his wife. </p><p>It should be required viewing for any power tool user.</p><p>It's horribly shocking, and I was disturbed for quite some time afterwards.</p><p>If you must google 'minor tablesaw accident.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a really horrible video on the interwebs , it shows some poor fool lopping off his thumb , while making cabinets for his wife .
It should be required viewing for any power tool user.It 's horribly shocking , and I was disturbed for quite some time afterwards.If you must google 'minor tablesaw accident .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a really horrible video on the interwebs, it shows some poor fool lopping off his thumb, while making cabinets for his wife.
It should be required viewing for any power tool user.It's horribly shocking, and I was disturbed for quite some time afterwards.If you must google 'minor tablesaw accident.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544606</id>
	<title>Re:Company sued for not using standard safety devi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268996640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would assume they would be sued because the car says it has the safety standards and doesn't, not because they didn't include it in the first place.</p><p>The question you are looking for is whether or not you could sue a car manufacturer who simply didn't include airbags at all in that model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would assume they would be sued because the car says it has the safety standards and does n't , not because they did n't include it in the first place.The question you are looking for is whether or not you could sue a car manufacturer who simply did n't include airbags at all in that model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would assume they would be sued because the car says it has the safety standards and doesn't, not because they didn't include it in the first place.The question you are looking for is whether or not you could sue a car manufacturer who simply didn't include airbags at all in that model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544688</id>
	<title>what is this bs</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1268997000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>this has to the the worst ruling ever. any type of saw can mangel you pretty good. we all know this and we use them with extreem care. so some dumb redneck buys the cheapest thing he can buy like most Americans do  and of course its not the best saw money can buy and he injures himself and sues the makers for being stupid. and the redneck jury agrees with him. people have been cutting libs off for a very very long time long before any kind of decent tech was out to prevent that. thers no safe saw and anyone who thinks so is a retard i dont care what kind of stuff you put on it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>this has to the the worst ruling ever .
any type of saw can mangel you pretty good .
we all know this and we use them with extreem care .
so some dumb redneck buys the cheapest thing he can buy like most Americans do and of course its not the best saw money can buy and he injures himself and sues the makers for being stupid .
and the redneck jury agrees with him .
people have been cutting libs off for a very very long time long before any kind of decent tech was out to prevent that .
thers no safe saw and anyone who thinks so is a retard i dont care what kind of stuff you put on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this has to the the worst ruling ever.
any type of saw can mangel you pretty good.
we all know this and we use them with extreem care.
so some dumb redneck buys the cheapest thing he can buy like most Americans do  and of course its not the best saw money can buy and he injures himself and sues the makers for being stupid.
and the redneck jury agrees with him.
people have been cutting libs off for a very very long time long before any kind of decent tech was out to prevent that.
thers no safe saw and anyone who thinks so is a retard i dont care what kind of stuff you put on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544410</id>
	<title>Re:But wait!</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1268995800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's part of the healthcare reform.  You did it without a doctor and without insurance.  The wrong people got paid.  It's the government's job to fix that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's part of the healthcare reform .
You did it without a doctor and without insurance .
The wrong people got paid .
It 's the government 's job to fix that ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's part of the healthcare reform.
You did it without a doctor and without insurance.
The wrong people got paid.
It's the government's job to fix that ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544330</id>
	<title>Crazy ? you are the one crazy.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1268995440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for condoning and even rationalizing a system which allows people lay claim to logical constructs and designs and not use them to do anything, but to extort money from those who attempting to use similar ideas.</p><p>so patent hoarding and trolling is not crazy, but 'use it or lose it' is crazy ? well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... american mindset alright. defies logic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for condoning and even rationalizing a system which allows people lay claim to logical constructs and designs and not use them to do anything , but to extort money from those who attempting to use similar ideas.so patent hoarding and trolling is not crazy , but 'use it or lose it ' is crazy ?
well ... american mindset alright .
defies logic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for condoning and even rationalizing a system which allows people lay claim to logical constructs and designs and not use them to do anything, but to extort money from those who attempting to use similar ideas.so patent hoarding and trolling is not crazy, but 'use it or lose it' is crazy ?
well ... american mindset alright.
defies logic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544994</id>
	<title>Price comparison</title>
	<author>Leuf</author>
	<datestamp>1268998620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Ryobi saw he was using costs about $150.  The only Sawstop saw available at the time cost over $3000.  There is currently a cheaper one for a modest $1750.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Ryobi saw he was using costs about $ 150 .
The only Sawstop saw available at the time cost over $ 3000 .
There is currently a cheaper one for a modest $ 1750 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Ryobi saw he was using costs about $150.
The only Sawstop saw available at the time cost over $3000.
There is currently a cheaper one for a modest $1750.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31570624</id>
	<title>Note to Self:</title>
	<author>n7ytd</author>
	<datestamp>1269279180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TO DO: Invent and patent pistol that does not fire (no firing pin?).  Fund lawsuit against firearm company for accidental shooting, requiring all firearms to license my patent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TO DO : Invent and patent pistol that does not fire ( no firing pin ? ) .
Fund lawsuit against firearm company for accidental shooting , requiring all firearms to license my patent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TO DO: Invent and patent pistol that does not fire (no firing pin?).
Fund lawsuit against firearm company for accidental shooting, requiring all firearms to license my patent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544512</id>
	<title>Re:Mandatory safety enhancements</title>
	<author>Radical Moderate</author>
	<datestamp>1268996280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seatbelts save lives and increase the cost of a car by a fraction of a percent.  Stopsaw won't save any lives (fingers and hands, yes), and the cheapest StopSaw costs 16 times more than what I paid for my table saw.  I'm not sure where to draw the line, but there's a hell of a lot of territory between those two points.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seatbelts save lives and increase the cost of a car by a fraction of a percent .
Stopsaw wo n't save any lives ( fingers and hands , yes ) , and the cheapest StopSaw costs 16 times more than what I paid for my table saw .
I 'm not sure where to draw the line , but there 's a hell of a lot of territory between those two points .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seatbelts save lives and increase the cost of a car by a fraction of a percent.
Stopsaw won't save any lives (fingers and hands, yes), and the cheapest StopSaw costs 16 times more than what I paid for my table saw.
I'm not sure where to draw the line, but there's a hell of a lot of territory between those two points.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544910</id>
	<title>Or how many present safety devices did he disable?</title>
	<author>Leuf</author>
	<datestamp>1268998200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every table saw has a guard that covers the blade, though it is not usable for every possible cut.  Was he performing a cut where the guard could have been used but didn't have it in place?  How many of the safety procedures spelled out in the manual did he ignore?  It is very difficult to hurt yourself with a table saw while following all the safety rules, and common sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every table saw has a guard that covers the blade , though it is not usable for every possible cut .
Was he performing a cut where the guard could have been used but did n't have it in place ?
How many of the safety procedures spelled out in the manual did he ignore ?
It is very difficult to hurt yourself with a table saw while following all the safety rules , and common sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every table saw has a guard that covers the blade, though it is not usable for every possible cut.
Was he performing a cut where the guard could have been used but didn't have it in place?
How many of the safety procedures spelled out in the manual did he ignore?
It is very difficult to hurt yourself with a table saw while following all the safety rules, and common sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543904</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545328</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1269000300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's an up and coming technology, far from industry or consumer acceptance. The fact that the plaintiff opted against the technology when he bought his saw is evidence of the latter. Because it's patented, there would be a lot of R&amp;D involved in working around it, not just a bit of design work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's an up and coming technology , far from industry or consumer acceptance .
The fact that the plaintiff opted against the technology when he bought his saw is evidence of the latter .
Because it 's patented , there would be a lot of R&amp;D involved in working around it , not just a bit of design work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's an up and coming technology, far from industry or consumer acceptance.
The fact that the plaintiff opted against the technology when he bought his saw is evidence of the latter.
Because it's patented, there would be a lot of R&amp;D involved in working around it, not just a bit of design work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544458</id>
	<title>Re:Not a "government" requirement</title>
	<author>akboss</author>
	<datestamp>1268995980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just like the jury did when the lady burned her hoochy with hot coffee.

Yeah tell me that some people who sit on juries are not mentally handicapped.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like the jury did when the lady burned her hoochy with hot coffee .
Yeah tell me that some people who sit on juries are not mentally handicapped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like the jury did when the lady burned her hoochy with hot coffee.
Yeah tell me that some people who sit on juries are not mentally handicapped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543970</id>
	<title>Re:Horrible summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell?! Where did anyone start talking about software?  The technology that Ryobi didn't license from the patent holder is a physical device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell ? !
Where did anyone start talking about software ?
The technology that Ryobi did n't license from the patent holder is a physical device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell?!
Where did anyone start talking about software?
The technology that Ryobi didn't license from the patent holder is a physical device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543836</id>
	<title>If you do a Bobbit Job on yourself</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have only yourself to blame !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have only yourself to blame !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have only yourself to blame !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31585138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547214
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545662
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_19_1928244_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549650
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544652
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544114
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545662
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31585138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546218
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547570
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544910
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546574
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544042
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544286
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545866
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544994
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545300
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544828
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544562
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544300
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31548362
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547700
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547972
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549614
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544368
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545056
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544056
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547550
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543804
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544372
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543982
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544384
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544318
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31549196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31546380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31550848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31547876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_19_1928244.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31543884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31544086
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_19_1928244.31545478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
