Legalize File Sharing, Say Swedish MPs

CrystalFalcon writes "In the past week, the file sharing debate has exploded in Sweden, with numerous mainstream politicians finally having understood the issue. Last week, seven Swedish MPs wrote a prominent opinion piece saying that fully legalized file sharing is not just the best solution, it's the only solution. Now their number has increased to 13, and the issue continues to grow. Good summaries at TorrentFreak and P2P Consortium. Original opinion piece in English here."

Comments

That is the democratic way of dealing with it

[Wooky_linuxer]

After all, in a democratic country, if a very large percentage of the population willingly infringes a law, there is a very strong case that the law is wrong, not the people. So I guess in any (truly) democratic country file-sharing and similar attitudes regarding "intellectual property" should be legal.

Re:That is the democratic way of dealing with it

[CrystalFalcon]

Exactly. If a large enough percentage of the population wants the law to change, they will simply vote in new politicians.

Most of the time, the existing politicians sense this is about to happen ahead of time, and change the law themselves.

That's how democracy works. Or at least, how it's supposed to work.

Not surprised

[Armakuni]

It seems that any actual societal progress comes from Europe these days, while the US is sinking deeper into a Republican/corporate mire. This is just another example.

Because it's the right thing to do

[YA_Python_dev]

I agree, but not only because there are so many people pirating, but simply because this is the right thing to do. It's not about pirating or saving a few bucks: one of the primary reasons for the existence of nations is to contribute to the diffusion and development of culture (I live in Italy and here we have this clearly written in one of the first articles of our constitution; the proposed European constitution says pretty much the same thing).

Copyright was established as a state-created monopoly, for a limited time, to encourage the creation and diffusion of artistic works. Not to guarantee an endless stream of money to the MAFIAA lawyers. It's pretty clear that the creation and diffusion of art, music, movies, books, etc. is doing pretty well today (probably better than any other period in human history!) despite, and sometimes thanks to, the huge diffusion of filesharing and piracy.

So there's no need to outlaw it. It's that simple: copyright isn't a law of nature, it was accepted as a compromise to achieve an end and can be changed if necessary.

Re:Sure,

[neuron2neuron]

God, I hate pseudo-arguments like this; taking one aspect of the argument and spinning it, but ok, I'll bite

a) worked on many different TV shows
b) worked for a record company
c) have a couple of patents
and d) I write.

Of course, you'd know of d alrady - I wrote the piece for TorrentFreak.

The point of the pieces through, isn't abolishing copyright, returning to anarchy, but instead that attempting to criminalise a large section of the population, because an industry hasn't moved on, nor learned from past attempts (with the VCR and MP3 players specifically mentioned).

I just hope your writing is a damned sight better than your reading comprehension.

Re:Sure,

[randomaxe]

In a world where content is created only by those who really enjoy doing it, and not by those who are simply in it for the money, there would be no Britney Spears albums, no Michael Bay movies, and no more anything by Dr. Phil. The Church of Scientology would dry up and disappear due to a shortage of funds and perceived "star power". I am having a very difficult time understanding what is "bad" about any of this.