Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Party Comes to the U.S.
Spy der Mann writes "Wired news has published an interview with the Pirate Party of the U.S., which was formed a week after the raid on Pirate Bay. The group patterns itself after Piratpartiet, the Swedish political party associated with The Pirate Bay, and says it wants to reform intellectual property and privacy laws."
We could certainly take a long hard look at copyright law in this country. It's become clear to me that the public domain is, for all intents and purposes, closed. Everytime Mickey gets close to falling into PD congress will suddenly find it in their interest to extend copyright.
The should not have given their party a self-defeating name.
And I thought they were joking when I saw a comment on Digg or here, (cant remember which), that there was going to become a Pirate Bay USA, will never happen but good to see a little good come out of the RIAA and USA make jackasses out of themselves in the raid.
With the election system of the US, it's always 2 parties with nobody having thet slightest chance to muscle in, at best in local elections (which, frankly, have no impact on copyright laws).
:)
But I support the idea. The idea has been picked up by our communists. I guess I'll become a comrade.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
At least they didn't spell it this way: P1r8 P4rty
Yarrrr!
It be about time that someone be takin' up the mantle of IP reform and greater privacy! Fer sure, the twin armadas of the Republicrats and Democans have failed to take it on, and e'en the Libertarians and Greens don't talk too much about it.
Avast, mateys! Perchance finally there be a Party worth votin' for.
Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
Ah come now, if a political party called the "Whigs" can be reputable and successful enough for the history books, I think an openly tongue-in-cheek Pirate Party stands a chance :-)
I'm not very confident in a group that's set to reform our copyright/patent system when they cannot even have enough common sense to realize that a name such as "The Pirate Party" is NOT going to be taken seriously here in the U.S. This time is investment is better spent on something that has somewhat of a chance in hell.
"True refinement seeks simplicity."
I like what you have to say and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :D
"In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
Maybe its a bad name, but when I saw it originally, I said to myself, "are these guys serious? I have to see what they're really about." I think a lot more people will think the same way...
Also this way the "piracy thing" is right there to discuss at the beginning instead of the **AA bringing it up at some other inopportune time.
Join our Party and fight Global Warming!
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
A party called "The Reformation of IP Law Party" won't get any press. We already have tons of third-parties that people don't even know exist. The flame-mongering Pirate Party might draw some notice. And in this case, I think any press would be good press.
The Swedish party is named horribly as well, and they seem to be doing quite well.
Holy convergance of idealologies Batman!
We all know Al Gore is all about Global Warming (See Here), and we also know there is a direct link between the number of pirates and the average temperature of the earth! (See Here)
This cannot be an accident - it's fate!
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
I'm not necessarily a fan of what the Pirate Party represents. But, sometimes, overkill on the other side of the problem may work to balance the mess out. I just hope that we can eventually find a happy medium.
And yet, it was terrorism (and a form of communism; after all, they had to work and share together) that set America on the path to independence from England.
Likewise, OSS was labeled as terrorism/communism by some, and now it is pretty much understood that it is one of the truer forms of capitalism (and charity).
Somewhere down the road, as ip laws are changed, this group may be changed from being consider terrorists to heros.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
...why's the rum gone?! (Look away kiddies, this post be rated ARRRR!!!)
Honestly, at this point, I *do* support piracy.
After seeing how the Republicans are selling my ass out to the telecoms in the house*, I--someone who has been registered as a republican for as long as he could vote--am dumping that party until it comes to its senses.
Keel haul the blaggards!
* There are plenty of reasons to dump them, not just Net Neutrality. It's just that that's the absolute last straw. At this point, I feel like I'm throwing my vote away voting for either of the two main parties, anyhow so I might as well vote with someone I agree with...
With that name they'll get the religious left on their side. As a Pastafarian I can state that by definition our religion will have to fully support the Pirate Party.
Who is John Galt?
What should they do? Cave to the normal customs of politics and call themselves the "People's Party for Free and Democratic Property Rights"? We've lived with euphemisms long enough that it's a banality that "the longer a country's name is (the more words like 'free' and 'democratic' it contains), the worse the country is."
This is not a normal political party. They do not want to act within the established sphere of law and government, they want to change them. Maybe calling themselves Pirates will make people (especially the millions and millions of people who want the same things) realize that the *AA's of the world are villainizing intelligent people who contribute to society. If someone identifies with the Pirate Party, maybe they'll say, hey, I don't feel good about being called evil all the time.
Note: obviously, I see your point, I could have made it myself and I don't think you're dumb, nor do I disagree with you all that much. But c'mon. Would a party by any other name be able to get attention, respect, and votes if they had the same agenda? I think if anything, somebody else would give them the nickname "the Pirate Party," and then they'd be guilty of dressing that up, but the public would still see the name "Pirate Party" being thrown around.
Have you seen '8 Mile'? In the battle at the end, where Em/B. Rabbit throws out all the obvious ammo his opponent would have? I see this as pretty similar.
It's an uphill, probably impossible battle in either case; it's just a bold stroke to come out with it and call themselves "the Pirate Party," and I'm interested to see where they go with it and how much we'll hear about it from other outlets.
Actually, as logn as we've had the current two party system, single issue parties have really been the only ones that have succeeded..sort of. Works like this:
1. People found a party around an issue they feel is important but neither major party agrees.
2. Small single-issue party grows bigger
3. One major party takes notice, and absorbs the issue, effectively disbanding the party
I'm not saing it's great, but I suppose it's a kind of victory
It says "securing for limited Times". What needs to made clear(er) in the Constitution is that Copyright laws that demonstrably do *not "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" are not valid.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
why don't all these groups that want to repeal such and such bad law, or change this law, or whatnot, just get together and lobby for campaign finance reform. once that's done they can actually have a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting done what they originally set out to do.
I agree that we need to seriously reform the patent system in the United States. But the Pirate Party isn't going to do this. In fact, one might argue that all it will successfully accomplish is marginalizing the issue and its supporters. There are dozens (if not more) third parties in the US. It is very hard (and in this day and age almost impossible) for a third party to have any electoral success (it does happen on a community level in certain places around the country). There are key differences between the electoral systems of most European countries and the US. In the US, we have a single-member district system that is winner take all. It makes our system functionally a two-party system. Most of Europe has a proporational representation system. Voters in Europe vote for the party, not the candidate. All that is needed for a small party to gain seats in a parliamentary body is to get over the threshold (whatever that threshold may be). Sometimes, that threshold is as low as 5%. Here in the US, you need a plurality of the vote at least (in some parts of the country, you need an outright majority). The pirate party getting 50.1% of the vote? I don't think so. Even 40-45%, not likely. To insist on something like this, just because it works in Sweden is to deny the reality of the electoral constraints place upon the US system.
From the interview:
Sigal: I think the raid is what brought this whole thing to my attention, and to the attention of people around the world. The raid in Sweden could turn out to be the best thing that happened to the internet community. I think it backfired on the MPAA. They wanted to take down a site they thought was illegal, but everyone noticed that the MPAA is terrorizing the people.
No kidding. Whether or not the party manages to elect any members, its time to bring these issues to the public on every front possible, including the political front. A strong grassroots effort behind the Pirate Party would throw these tactics right back in the face of the *IAA organizations.
Right. Through history, a lot of names that originally were "stupid" have lost their insulting nature and turned into respected titles. Actions do in fact speak louder than words, so if this party can actually accomplish something I'd think their choice of words for their name will cease to be a bother.
bashing the name. Most of the time i agree. I, myself, support things like the Green AND Libertarian parties over the Republocrats. I love Defective by Design, much like how i have much respect for the Green and Libertarian parties in the US, the Pirate Party in Sweden, and quite a many groups that may or may not be political parties. There's lots of great advocate groups out there fighting for noble causes.. for smaller government, tech rights, privacy rights, IP law, workers rights, environmental rights, you name it. But most of all of these groups suffer a similar fault and that's one of presentation. Very rarely do they show us that they're professional, they're websites look like crap, they're protests are childish, their statements to the public.. while i might agree with, can get a bit ridiculous at times. Groups like these people who can do something about it.. simply will never take seriously. I'm suprised Defective by Design has done what it has. But frankly if Richard Stallman wants to be taken seriously his needs to quit being a sappy bitch, cut his hair, trim his facial hair and learn how to dress and address professionals, government leaders, and the public. None of these groups that i adore so very much stands a chance in hell, until they can present themselves in a manner the rest of the world will take serious. Generation after generation, people simply don't seem to grasp this concept... and it's a trivial fact of life that makes a huge fucking difference that none of us are going to change. And until people wake up and quit prancing around in obnoxious outfits outside of corporate and government offices, they will be written off as nutbags, hippies, drug addicts, radicals, etc.. Now all of this being said.. The language has already been firmly planted about pirates and piracy. It's engrained into the entertainment and technological culture as it stands. This word isn't going away. I sit and i watch as the word "liberal" has become a dirty dirty word.. and watch the Democrats and Greens try to re-identify themselves as "progressive".. and it's not really working. This country is leaning towards Dems, not b/c this nation is liberal..but b/c they're tired of Republicans. It's really hard to escape a word and play semantics and hope you're new identification for what you do will take a stronger hold. As we've seen with the word "nigga" (though this has nothing to do with professionalism or politics), it's much easier to make an insulting word.. empowering. It has a very "stick it the man" attitude about it and gives way for great marketing. While i don't find it to be the height of professionalism and the ability to be taken seriously.. what are they going to call themselves? The Sharing Party? You think tree huggers get picked on.. that'd be nothing compared to this. I mean seriously.. there's not many names i could think of that would fit. The "lets not always maximize profits party". I mean.. maybe i'm not creative, but you tell me what would be a better idea.
Let me know when the Ninja Party makes its way to the US. Ninjas beat pirates any day. I'm sure they would totally flip out and pass an act abolishing copyright, the *AA, and panhandling all at once. The first two for obvious reasons, the second and third because ninjas don't like whiners.
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
You, and people like you, saying it's "futile" and third party votes are "wasted" are the cause of the two party problem. You've helped brainwash the american voter into thinking it's a coin toss, and he should pick the "lesser of two evils".
Then on election day, we see some bullshit like "49% people favor John Kerry and 51% people favor George Bush". Which we all know is wrong. Nearly everybody, in the last election, thought both candidates sucked.
Vote for who you want to vote for. They may not win, but we won't be sending some assclown to the whitehouse with some bullshit "51% american support" argument. The next time the republicrats win, I want to see the number say "7%", followed by maybe Greens or Libertarians with 4% and 5% type numbers. I want the numbers to clearly demonstrate what the people want.
If that were to happen, and the two parties will realize just how tenuous their connection to the voters are, and things will start to change.
But instead, all of the apathetic slugs out there contribute the the problem by saying "I really like blah-blahs positions but I dont want to waste my vote so I dunno, Hillary Clinton I guess".
Vote for the Pirate Party if you like them. They don't have to win to send a message.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0603e.asp The New Mercantilism
m l The Fraud of Intellectual Property
http://www.lewrockwell.com/mcelroy/mcelroy17.html Patently Absurd
http://www.lewrockwell.com/sapienza/sapienza36.ht
http://www.mises.org/blog/archives/002935.asp Mises Economics Blog: Bill Gates: Anti-IP Movement Is Communist
I wish the Pirate party far better success than the Libertarians have had. It is surprising that the message of Liberty does not resonate in the United States.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
The problem with parties with a limited scope on issues is that there is far too much room for the elected officle to slide in his own agenda. What would a party with such a small target issue do when it comes to other issues is anyones guess and it makes them a political loose cannon that serious political party supporters are going to have a problem funding even if their target issue is a good one.
Granted, no established party is going to really take this issue on in such a way either so I guess it leaves the public that wants this type of reform SOL.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
>Everytime Mickey gets close to falling into PD congress will suddenly find it in their interest to extend copyright.
Disney and all the rest of the those with vested interestes in intellectual property have more money than anyone could possibly counter with enough votes to make a difference.
It's all about the cash. Votes are just something to make you feel like you have a representative government.
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Copyright is supposed to be a compromise whereby both the creator of the content and society (most importantly, society) benefit. Since the content "owners" are no longer holding up their part of the bargain, I see no reason why we should continue to hold up ours!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Actually, that's what I thought at first when they showed up in Sweden too - but I've come to the conclusion that "Pirate Party" is pretty darn clever. It's provocative and attention grabbing ... with the "Copyright Reform Party" or your other suggestions, all we're getting is another EFF. Who are doing an amazing job, of course, but they're not exactly well known (beyond slashdot circles).
These guys are trying to throw a wrench into the machinery; calling themselves "The Pirate Party" helps.
If they can get themselves sued over the name, all the better. They need all the mainstream attention they can get.
And this is where Approval Voting comes into play.
Basically, the idea is that you may vote for as many of the candidates as you approve of.
For instance, a good chunk of people enjoy many of the ideas that the Libertarian party believes in. This same chunk of people often has to make a choice between voting for a democrat or a republican, because everyone knows third parties stand no chance here.
Now, under the Approval voting system, you could vote for both the Libertarian candidate and the party you would have ended up voting for had you no choice.
Now, I do not believe that the Libertarian party would win. What I do believe is that they would receive a much larger number of votes, and many of the idea would be much harder for the main two parties to ignore.
The same, of course, would happen to the Pirate Party. They are not going to win, let's face it. But, if they were to receive a vote from 15-30% of the population (a reasonable goal), the major parties could not ignore that.
What makes this system so great, however, is the incredible ease of implementation. It isn't complicated for voters to understand, and ballots could already support multiple votes.
"...when, as in this case, Congress has not altered the traditional contours of copyright protection, further First Amendment scrutiny is unnecessary."
By implication, this means laws that do alter the "contours" can be challenged constitutionally. I'm thinking DMCA, esp. anticircumvention... which goes beyond the prohibition of copying and denies mere access to works, as pointed out in a good chapter of a very mediocre book: Protecting Ideas by David L. Hudson.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
If the EFF would add Union to their name, then they'd be the "EFF U" which is catchy and marketable.
Just saying.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Hint 2: it doesn't take 100+ years to realize a profit on your intellectual endeavor, if that's your taste. Especially nowadays. As a general rule, your book/record/film is going to profit in its first five years of life or never. If anything, terms should be getting shorter as distribution & marketing technologies continue to improve.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
The original Mickey Mouse film trilogy was Plane Crazy, Gallopin' Gaucho, and Steamboat Willie. Any traits of the character that appeared in the original trilogy would pass into PD along with the films.
O rly? The Supreme Court ruled the other way in Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. , where Justice Scalia wrote that a trademark can't be hacked to extend copyright.
The US Census Bureau exists to implement the constitutional requirement for an enumeration. A hard limit of half a life expectancy would be easy to implement based on data that the Census Bureau and similar government agencies already publish. But then pegging the copyright term to the progress of medical arts it might make the copyright industry support the drug industry.
Ugh. If someone likes your house, and they take it away from you, you no longer have it. If someone likes your house, and replicates it on their own property (the method is unimportant to this discussion), does that diminish the value of your home?
Why do you, as an artist feel that you should be able to mooch off your one big work for the rest of your life (and your children's lives, etc.)? Do you think it would be equitable for the person who painted your house to receive a royalty check every time someone admires your house? Should the plumber get a check every time you flush your toilet?
This is not intended as a flame. I seriously want to know, from someone who feels this entitlement, where do you draw the line? How can you make these comparisons with a straight face?
Our Pasta, who "Arghh" in heaven, Swallowed be thy shame.
Thy Midgit come. Thy Sauce be yum, On top some grated Parmesan.
Give us this day our garlic bread. And give us our cutlasses,
As we swashbuckle, splice the main-brace and cuss.
And lead us into temptation, But deliver us some Pizza.
For thine are Meatballs, and the beer, and the strippers, for ever and ever. RAmen.
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Mon
He didn't create the money in the bank. He created something of value (to someone) and was paid for it. He got paid for the perceived value he added. If he stopped adding that value, he would stop getting paid. Now he has enough money that he can invest it in other venues that add value, and claim some of the reward for that added value, but that is neither here nor there. It's the same thing for office workers. They stop adding value they stop getting paid. Let's say I'm a psychologist. I create contentment (if I'm any good). Do I get to control the level of contentment in the people I treat after I'm done treating them? I created it (it wasn't there before I did my work). Is it not mine?
No problems here. This is really how I feel it should work. You created something, you got paid for your work. As a painter, or a sculptor you charge admission to view your work. As a singer you hold concerts. As a songwriter, you write music for singers to sing.
And if you found that people were not willing to pay this much, would you complain about the fact that you couldn't make a living at it?
I imagine the pun was unintentional. In any case, this is simply not true. If you are a good plumber, then people will continue to call on your services. If you are a good artist, people will continue to call on your services. If your plumbing skills are sub-par, you are likely not going to be able to make a living at it*. Same thing for an artist. If nobody likes your work enough to make it worth your while to continue to produce it, why should you continue to get paid for the work that you did in the past? The biggest difference I see is the potential glamor of being a big name artist means there is a glut of supply there. Contrast the number of people who wish to be a rock star as a career, versus the number of people who dream of being a plumber.
I still feel my question is left unanswered. Where does this sense of entitlement to be paid for past work come in?