Slashdot Mirror
Swedish Pirate Party Gains 3000 Members In 7 Hours
An anonymous reader writes "Due to outrage over the verdict in The Pirate Bay trial, the Swedish Pirate Party has gained 3000 members in less than 7 hours. It is now bigger than 3 of the 7 parties represented in the Swedish parliament. 'Ruling means that our political work must now be stepped up. We want to ensure that the Pirate Bay activities — to link people and information — is clearly lawful. And we want to do it for all people in Sweden, Europe and the world, continues Rick Falk Vinge. We want it to be open for ordinary people to disseminate and receive information without fear of imprisonment or astronomical damages.'"
Wow. I honestly didn't think TPB broke any swedish laws. The name is cute but the site doesn't favor pirated content over legal content. I don't get it.
A party it will be.... Just hope it doesn't end up some sophomoric anger fest and the spokespeople have a solid message and play by the rules.
flinging poop since 1969
Do what you want, 'cause a pirate is free,
YOU ARE A PIRATE!
Yar har, fiddle di dee,
Being a pirate is alright to be,
Do what you want 'cause a pirate is free,
You are a pirate!
(spoken)You are a pirate!
(crowd)Yay!
We've got us a map, (a map!)
To lead us to a hidden box,
That's all locked up with locks! (with locks!)
And buried deep away!
We'll dig up the box, (the box!)
We know it's full of precious booty!
Burst open the locks!
And then we'll say hooray!
so what we have here is a possibility that in the future a 'pirate' party controls the government maybe? Would Obama with his RIAA lawyer friends declare Sweden to be part of axis of evil and will actually bomb them to bring in the democracy US style (where only 2 parties are really allowed to hold the government in practice).
That bunker, that one of their ISP has may just come in handy.
You can't handle the truth.
I suggest creating a facebook group and tying a coloured ribbon around the antennae of your car. This is what we do in Canada.
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
A political party is worthless if it doesn't have any card-carrying members in office legislating, judiciating or executing... (that doesn't quite sound right, but okay... you get the idea)
When is the next election cycle? THAT is when things really get shaken up.
Sweden is getting feisty.
and losing in the court of public opinion.
isn't it any wonder that this verdict is so provocative? There's an elephant in the room, and this is just the sort of news that could make people take a second look. We all know that copying in an age of information abundance is inevitable. And so is the martyrdom of the TPB founders. All power to their elbows. Shame it didn't happen just before Easter...
Are You Ready Swedes?
Aye Aye Captain
I Can't Hear You
AYE AYE CAPTAIN
OHHHHHH
Who lives in a datacenter under the sea?
computer vetenskapsman!
Absorbant and yellow and porous are we?
computer vetenskapsman!
Who's nautical nonsense be something you wish?
computer vetenskapsman!
So drop on the deck and flop like a fish! computer vetenskapsman!
Ready?
computer vetenskapsman!
computer vetenskapsman!
computer vetenskapsman!
computer vetenskapsman!
Har Har!
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
This is taken from the automaticly translated article.
If these guys are genuine that may be something. By genuine I mean fight intellectual property nonsense, not nut jobs who believe that it is ok to just take others work. They don't sound genuine, however.
I said this before but I say it again. I think business is good in general, a chronic lack of wealth has a negative effect on sociality. However large corporations (I believe this started in the eighties) now think that to protect their profits they must control a market. This is done through laws that where instituted by means of lobbying, or the extension of laws to areas where they were never meant for. Its OK if there are three or so other big players, then you cant be called a monopoly and be broken up. These people (like banks) have a short term view of things and can harm the competitiveness of the western world.
You can see this in music, with fees for sampling music. There even a role over rate involved so if an artist has success they pay more for the samples per song, which consumes most of your profit. (the four) Big companies in music are the ones who profit while every one pays out. IP also plays a apart in IT as well, with the added negative (from our view) that companies don't even have to have a strong case, you cant afford 5 million in court fees so you must settle
Sweden has 10 million peoeple - 3000 isn't that many. This is like saying "Alaska's secessionist party has 150 more people because Palin lost!" To play a real part in politics they'll need at least 10x as many people.
More importantly, this case is giving the issue a lot of renewed attention. I'm happy about that.
In other news, RIAA navy seals under cover of night parachute into Swedish prison and with 4 well placed shots.....
So it is just fine that copyright, the agreement between "the people" and the creators (actually, the publishers who buy up the content for exclusive distribution and control), has been abused and distorted to the point that works that would be public domain have how completely fallen off the face of the earth? The notion of copyright has been completely twisted to become a control on all entertainment. That was NOT its intent. "The people" were not represented when these changes were imposed and "the people" will have to take it back. In the mean time, civil disobedience is what we are doing -- taking freely as we please in spite of bad law.
It's not stealing. That's why they use the word "infringement." Stealing is depriving others of their property. That isn't what is happening.
That's nice. When is the next election and how many candidates will they be able to field, exactly?
It's interesting the difference with the US. "Kids" in Sweden are engaging properly in the political process, forming a party and making (real) change happen. Rather than just rolling over and accepting the situation with "nothing we can do" and "who can we vote for, they're all the same".
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
Do you pay Time-Warner when you sing "Happy Birthday to you" in public,
or do you steal/pirate it?
Shame on you.
You know, I LOVE Canada 'n all, and my Grandpa was from Prince Edward Island, but colored ribbons on the antenna?
Apparently you're no Geek.
I suggest a small cycling multicolored LED, glued to a battery and rare earth magnet attached to one's antenna, as a way to show solidarity.
One could even make an inductive charger for it, so it could be removed at night, and recharged.
If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
Do you have to Swedish to donate to the party? I'd love to send them some cash for being the heroes they are.
I'd love to see copyright brought down to about 5 years, where the creator has a chance to be recompensed for their work, but dirty leeches like the RIAA won't have room to exist.
Freedom to do what with media as you please. I think of them as freedom fighters. Without them these media companies would keep infringing on peoples rights. Having legitimately bought cd's upload DRM to a users computer without them knowing is the exact sort of sh!t that makes this evermore important for the majority of consumers. I personally think unknowingly hacking mass amounts of computers is worse then downloading a safe alternative. You can go to jail quite readily for hacking a computer, stealing a CD not so much. The RIAA cases are a clear example as to why these media corporations are as evil as any pirate, viking or Persian. At the end of the day we might see more bands (NIN RADIOHEAD) move towards a distribution model that puts them in control. This movement can only help everybody except the sleezy middle men that have been dictating trends and prices for decades. The fact that people have created there own distribution model and it's working better then the old one shows the futility in the now obsolete model of the past. I would love to see these media companies walk the plank.....
I was pleasantly suprised to read a story about the ruling on the Danish public service channel's homepage today. The Danish advokatrådet (council of solicitors) has pointed out that the decision could have consequences for other sites that merely link to illegal files, like Google, and have encouraged the responsible minister to take preventative action. So here's hoping the ruling will end up helping us get some reasonable legislation passed!
And that information wants to be "Free," I suppose...?
That's fine. Of course, if all TPB was "link people to information," they would not be in this mess. What they did, was link people to *entertainment*, which I understand wants to be paid for, more times than not.
check out John Stewart's crack about illegal downloading.
We have similar situations all over the world and in Germany too. Legislatory and Courts not understanding the concepts in Network technology and that they require a whole new different approach and perspective for reasonable legislation and judgement. At the same time IT is growing so fast and becoming a central part of our lives that the people affected are a significant political force. I think this is sort of a generation problem too. What I find interesting is that more and more the effect of IT on our lives - and thus on politics aswell - is growing stronger and stronger. I hope this party gains traction in sweden and isn't just a fad.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
This is so true. I'm tired of hearing this generation moaning about the two party system, and then doing nothing about it except not voting. This lazy, apathetic attitude is why nothing ever changes in America. If you don't like the two main parties, then join another, or start your own. I can't remember who said it, but it's truer now than it ever was before: in a democracy, people get exactly the government they deserve.
It's Rick Falkvinge not Falk Vinge. Trivia: Falkvinge essentially means wing of falcon
Final count... 5000 new members today.
Considering that Hitler was afraid of invading Sweden, Obama should be careful.
I lived in Sweden for a while years ago, and the whole country is a fortress. When you walk in the woods, sometimes you find a little concrete house, surrounded by a barbed wire fence and full of warning signs. Those are elevator shafts that go down to underground military installations.
I wouldn't be surprised if "Sweden" means "land of bunkers" in some old dialect... ;)
First of all, it's not stealing, it's copying. It's like when Jesus copied the fish and bread and fed all those people. Maybe some bakers and fishermen were pissed back then, but you know, it was for the common good. Copying was obviously the right thing to do then and it's obviously the right thing to do today.
(ps. Whether or not Jesus actually had star trek gear or it is a made up story, is irrelevant)
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
The elections for the European Parliament are on June 7.
That's what we're focusing all our efforts on right now. It's an entirely realistic goal, and we're planning to make it.
Vice Chairman Piratpartiet
Candidate for the European Parliament
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
Um, in most bookstores I have been to (including large chain stores like Barnes and Nobel), no one cares if you take a book from the shelf, sit down in one of the comfortable chairs and read as much of the book as you like. It is stealing whenever you take a book out of a bookstore without paying because the store lost a physical book that cost real money to print, etc. What "piracy" is doing is simply reading the book in the store, no loss of the book and someone is perfectly free to read the same book. Only, "piracy" is a bit less damaging because while a bookstore has a finite amount of a certain book, anything digital can make a copy in less than a second with no loss by either side. So not only are you reading a book, but hundreds to millions of others can read the book too.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
MPAA, click here: http://google.com/images?q=movie+poster
RIAA, click here: http://google.com/images?q=cd+cover
OMG! Rampant contributory copyright and trademark infringement! Right here in the US by a Fortune 200 company.
(Just thought I'd help you get started on your next case.)
I hear Somalia is more receptive to piracy.
You are stealing, despite your bullshit names and excuses.
It isn't just his names, its the name used by the legal systems of most civilized countries in the world. Tell me, if infringement equals stealing, why wouldn't the law just call it that? Why invent a new term? It obviously hasn't occurred to you that there is a difference, you just don't want to see it.
Calling it stealing is nothing less than propaganda from the media industry.
At the end of the day we might see more bands (NIN RADIOHEAD) move towards a distribution model that puts them in control. This movement can only help everybody except the sleezy middle men that have been dictating trends and prices for decades. The fact that people have created there own distribution model and it's working better then the old one shows the futility in the now obsolete model of the past.
The fact that some bands who have managed to go through the system and come out the other side (something very few bands manage to stay relevent long enough to do) have started selling direct proves very little. It's nothing new either, the beatles set up thier own record company for instance.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
So it is just fine that copyright, the agreement between "the people" and the creators ... civil disobedience is what we are doing -- taking freely as we please in spite of bad law ... It's not stealing. That's why they use the word "infringement." Stealing is depriving others of their property. That isn't what is happening.
Really what's going on here is that both sides are demanding more control. Don't pretend that pirates would respect "reasonable" copyright laws. If copyright was reduced to 5 years, pirates would still ignore it entirely. In fact, you admit as much when you say, "It's not stealing... Stealing is depriving others of their property."
justice served. That will teach them to sieze an American ship and taking its captain hostage!
Stealing is depriving others of their property. That isn't what is happening.
Yes, it is.
Did you miss the part about the fine? Blatantly stealing from TPB's operators.
Well I wouldn't steal a car and I wouldn't steal a handbag.
And I wouldn't steal a cd from a brick'n'mortar stall.
But I'd still download music from a pirate torrent tracker.
Because that is copying and not stealing at all.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
"Calling it stealing is nothing less than propaganda"
You mean like "sharing"?
That argument is irrelevant and also rather wrong. What is likely to happen is that while some people would persist in their normal activities, but many would begin waiting those few years and frankly, if they were suddenly all this stuff available in the public domain, we would be so saturated in $1 DVDs in discount stores that the flood would make the whole situation unpredictable in terms of how things would balance out. But frankly, it would be the only sane approach. As it is, technological control measures and current methods of storage and encoding will make access to those expired works very unlikely. The greater good should be served. The media people will definitely make less money and so sad for that. Copyright is supposed to be for creators, not publishers! (Okay, that point is debatable, but every time we hear complaints, the "starving artists" are always being cited as the cause. And we know that media people would never lie to the government or to us... right?
Buying needs to be easier than infringement. That is the ultimate solution for everyone and the market will be allowed to do its job.
I just have to reply to your sig...
[Piracy is] so bad that some Chinese artists have announced they have stopped recording b/c it has become unprofitable.
GOOD FUCKING RIDDANCE!!!
Peter sunde for prime minister? Anyone think the swedes will attempt to ban him from running? Anyone think THAT may lead to a riot? Sweden better not mess this up or may need to figure out how to stop a revolution. :P
Astronomical? Like in millions of millions of stars?
If you compare to Oslo, the capitol of Norway, the closes neighbour to Sweden, the four guys have been sentenced to pay the price of a big house each (that is: four houses in total, in case I get the wording wrong) in the second most expensive part of the city. It's a lot of money (a lot!), but hardly astronomical.
this was posted by Anonymous Coward at another site today but i thought it would fit nicely here. "As to predictions... Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1841, against the extension of copyright http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_(Macaulay) Only quoting the ending, but the speech as a whole is a very good read "I am so sensible, Sir, of the kindness with which the House has listened to me, that I will not detain you longer. I will only say this, that if the measure before us should pass, and should produce one-tenth part of the evil which it is calculated to produce, and which I fully expect it to produce, there will soon be a remedy, though of a very objectionable kind. Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers. At present the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. No tradesman of good repute will have anything to do with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law: and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot. On which side indeed should the public sympathy be when the question is whether some book as popular as Robinson Crusoe, or the Pilgrim's Progress, shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress? Remember too that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop. The public seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create. And you will find that, in attempting to impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, annulled those restraints which now prevent men from pillaging and defrauding the living. If I saw, Sir, any probability that this bill could be so amended in the Committee that my objections might be removed, I would not divide the House in this stage. But I am so fully convinced that no alteration which would not seem insupportable to my honorable and learned friend, could render his measure supportable to me, that I must move, though with regret, that this bill be read a second time this day six months." S!
The Beatles were bigger than Jesus. The internet allows for new indie bands to make a name for themselves without having to shell out mad cash. These bands can also retain the image that THEY feel they want to portray rather then what a producer dictates. Selling direct is new in the sense that the internet is breaking new ground.
Just look no further then the pirate radio movement for insight as to the need for more open free access to bands that are not regulated by a major label. The same goes for documentaries and films. Technology is now at the point where amateurs can produce a really polished product without having to take another mortgage out on there house(s).
Bands indie movie makers and even game developers (world of goo anyone) would rather give the product away for free in the name of creating recognition for talent. This model is better because it has less start up costs and potential for even higher earnings in the long run. When people realize a game or movie was awesome and got it for free they may be inclined to send a few bucks out of respect. Making people pay up front only to be pissed that the product sucks is a dated and failing model.
I downloaded the Radiohead album, digged it but not as much as I did after realizing it was what I listened to more than anything else in my car (given the choice). After a month of having the album I sent them a few bucks.
Members atm:
http://lekstuga.piratpartiet.se/pp-ticker/longpolling/ticker.html
20 000 in a couple of minutes. Makes it a total of roughly 5000 new members today.
So it is just fine that copyright, the agreement between "the people" and the creators
Copyright as a social contract is a U.S.-specific feature. In European countries, it is usually viewed differently, from the perspective of "authors' moral rights".
I suppose they think we should be allowed to walk into bookstores, take items off the shelves and freely walk out without purchasing. You know. To free up the knowledge.
Oh, you mean like a library?
Next thing you know somebody will be starting the Ninja party.
You've never seen a Neil Young immitation band.
It's just that you can't sing his songs and sell them to make money
The difficult last election was that pirate party members didn't talk their friends & family into voting pirate. I think they wanted 3 votes for every member, but they only got about one, not sure.
Next election the pirate party must either get more non-members to vote pirate, or else help members talk non-members into voting for pirate friendly politicians.
You know, you can always send them money even if your not Swedish.
There is one flaw that I see in the Safe Harbor provisions, and that flaw is simply that there is no recourse against a false claim of infringement. Processing these requests does cost time, money, and at least some period where content can be made unavailable.
Perhaps it should be necessary to post a bond for the maximum amount of "claimed damages" prior to sending the notice, just to prevent damage to innocent non-infringers?
Do you pay Time-Warner when you sing "Happy Birthday to you" in public,
or do you steal/pirate it?
The multiphonic version most often heard at birthday parties, which starts out sung simultaneously in six dissonant keys and ends in five completely different ones, qualifies as a creative adaptation not subject to copyright.
Any lawyer with the balls to replay a recording of this version in court should get charged with contempt for assaulting the ears of the court.
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
Um, in most bookstores I have been to (including large chain stores like Barnes and Nobel), no one cares if you take a book from the shelf, sit down in one of the comfortable chairs and read as much of the book as you like. (...) Only, "piracy" is a bit less damaging because while a bookstore has a finite amount of a certain book, anything digital can make a copy in less than a second with no loss by either side.
And if the food store is giving away free samples and you eat ten samples and say "Well that was good but now I don't need to buy any" then that's not stealing either. But you're deliberately confusing a setting that is meant to give most people a sample with the intent of convincing them to purchase with a setting that completely substitutes purchasing. It works for Barnes and Noble because many people actually do make purchases, it works for the food store because many people actually buy food. If Barnes and Noble ended up working like a public library they'd need funding, if the food store ended up like a free dining hall your school/workplace would have to fund it. Your logical extrapolation from free samples to free everything just doesn't make sense.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
> we would be so saturated in $1 DVDs in discount stores
I hope not. I hope we would be saturated with 20c legal downloads of good quality DiVX. Or 3$/month all-five-year-old-movies-you-can see subscription plans.
It would be so easy to find interesting stuff that nobody would even bother to "pirate" anymore. Fan of 50's SciFi movies ? Here are a few thousands, for your viewing pleasure. Fan of wildlife documentaries ? Here a few other thousands.
You would not pay for the privilege of downloading, but for the privilege of not having to mess around with files, and stuff. Just point, click and watch. Right now, I know many people that download because they have no other way to get their hands on new material that they may or may not like.
In such an ecosystem, new work could be available on some sort of premium plans, but, as it will have to compete with older good stuff, it would have to be reasonably priced. And yes, it means that it'll start to be thought to make 300M$ movies. But it'll be easier to make 1M$ ones.
Of course, there is zero chance to ever see such thing implemented: first the copyright of the stuff since 1923 will not retroactively expire. Second, the morons hijacking the culture in the name of "entertainment industry" are currently selling mp3 songs at 1.29$, which should be the digital price of the whole album.
Not to say we also have... you know... libraries?
I operate a tor exit node and must admit that this is scary. I donate my traffic to people in china who have to route around their government's firewall. Some of them, torrent shit, even through port 80. It cannot be helped. I had hope that Sweden would stand up to the media corps, alas, a day may come where I, as a node operator, am sued for routing 'illegal' downloads.
Trying to install linux on my microwave, but keep getting a kernel panic...
Exactly. Legally speaking, theft is criminal. Most copyright infringement is civil. It's not just the terms that differ - these are entirely different classes of law.
That argument is irrelevant and also rather wrong.
In what way is it irrelevant and wrong? You claimed that pirates were principled activists reacting against unfair copyright. My point is simple: if copyright was "reasonable", or if copyright length hadn't been changed at all in the last 100 years, it would have zero effect on piracy - which goes to show that pirates aren't principled activists against unfair copyright. That's very relevant.
Stop pretending this is "civil disobedience".
Actually, I'd be 100 times more impressed with pirates if they made statements like "copyright should only exist for a reasonable amount of time; 20 years is a reasonable amount of time. Therefore, I refuse to honor copyright past 20 years, but fully respect copyright of all works less than 20 years old." The way things are right now is a bit like saying, "I don't like the way Walmart does business. Therefore, I'm practicing 'civil disobedience' when I steal this big-screen TV from Walmart." That raises the question: are you being principled, or are you merely using that as cover to get free stuff. The *right* way to protest is to boycott Walmart by not buying (or stealing). That shows that your protest isn't simply self-interest and greed masquerading as principles. Similarly, if you want to protest copyright, then you should neither buy nor pirate. When Black Americans in Georgia were angry with the segregated bus system, what did they do? They boycotted the bus-system and they *walked*. That was a principled boycott. They made their own lives harder to bring attention to the situation. Pirating is NOT making your own life harder, it's making it easier. Industries involved in copyright have zero reason to trust that your behavior will change even if copyright were "reasonable". Thus, they have very little impetus to change anything.
"Copyright is supposed to be for creators, not publishers!"
I think you'd be surprised by the number of creators who do keep their copyrights. Further, who owns the copyright seems to be irrelevant to pirates, anyway. I highly doubt any pirates could tell you whether a specific song, movie, or software was owned by the creator or the publisher. They just pirate it all with no regard for that question.
In the end, it sound more like excuses for piracy than any real argument; even if all of these things changed to meet your criteria, I highly doubt it would make much of a dent in piracy at all.
Buying needs to be easier than infringement.
How can buying ever be easier than copyright infringement? For one thing, copyright infringement means never having to pay money, and never having to type your credit card number into a form on the internet. That means pirating always has an inherent advantage over "paying for stuff".
Tired of overpriced Vehicle Lots selling nothing but Toyota Pickups that slurp an entire oil field to get to work? Buy a Ford Escort Today!
Economical! Saves Gas! Helps Detroit!
We also run a Cab Fleet. Need a lift?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I'm afraid the NaziS of Fun (as we like to call them) restrict all traffic to The Pirate Bay website, so I can't add a comment on their blog - and there's no other internet service available here.
As it happens, I've never used bit-torrents and I buy my music on CDs and my movies on DVDs, mostly from regular stores (occasionally from Amazon or the like) - but I'd like to register my support for The Pirate Bay and its operators nonetheless. Copyright law is overgrown, and it needs to be cut down to size. Same with the MPAA and the RIAA.
Alan R. Light
Ross Island
Antarctica
The Pirate Party webservers where melting yesterday. Many new members simply could not access the site to register.
She made the willows dance
It was impossible to get to their website for a few hours yesterday. More mebers signing up today.
She made the willows dance
Do you pay Time-Warner when you sing "Happy Birthday to you" in public,
Time Warner sold Warner Music Group to Edgar Bronfman in 2004.
They're TOTALLY free to create works and release them for distribution under whatever terms they want.
But is it even possible to write a song without copying part of an existing song?
Um, in most bookstores I have been to (including large chain stores like Barnes and Nobel), no one cares if you take a book from the shelf, sit down in one of the comfortable chairs and read as much of the book as you like.
But you still have to be inside the store to do this. This means you have to wait for a day when the buses run (not Sundays or major holidays) and the store is open, walk to the bus stop, wait for the bus to come, pay bus fare, wait for the bus to take you to the transfer point, walk to the other bus, wait for the bus to take you to the bus stop by the store, and walk to the store. And then when you're done, you have to walk to the bus stop, wait for the bus to come, pay bus fare, wait for the bus to take you to the transfer point, walk to the other bus, wait for the bus to take you to the bus stop by your home, and walk home. And you still have to schedule all this to finish before the buses stop running each day.
There is not one group of people and I don't claim they people who infringe on copyright are principled activitsts. There are MANY types of people and many different reasons for doing what they do. But the one thing they all have in common is that it is more convenience for them to do what they do than it is to buy it. People will ALWAYS do what people do. People have attempted legislation against homosexuality and it changed nothing -- some people are straight and some are gay. No amount of legislation will change what people do because it is who they are. Ultimately, the whole notion of copyright is fighting nature and nature only loses on small scales. (For example, you can build a building to keep out the rain, but you can change the weather... and no building ever stays up forever.)
"Civil disobedience" is motivated by a multitude of reasons and does not mean an organized effort. Civil disobedience is what people naturally do in the face of bad law. The fact that you seem to have read in "principled activists" into what I said shows that you are not arguing on what people say, but rather what people didn't say.
Your arguments are irrelevant largely because you read more than what is said in almost everything you post. You are quite the troll based on your comment history. I say that copyright (and indeed, intellectual property law in general... Mickey Mouse was supposed to be public domain by now!) goes too far and you say that nothing will stop pirates from "stealing." It is irrelevant. The reason why is because it is completely different from the argument I was making. There will ALWAYS be some copying and sharing. The industry and the legislators need to accept it. A proper balance should be found and supported so that the system is of benefit to both sides of the problem. As it stands, publishers are making MORE than enough profit from what they are doing and they were making lots of profit before all these draconian laws and technologies were introduced. The simple problem I see is excessive greed and abuse on the publisher's side.
Sometimes buying is more convenient than acquiring by other means. But acquiring entertainment media by other means doesn't mean it won't be bought later. For example, the more recent trand of putting out popular TV series out on DVD has led to my buying those TV series when they are available on DVD. In the mean time, those TV series are on my hard drive until such a time that they are available at stores... and are affordable. (For example, the short-lived series "Star Trek Enterprise" was initially put out as a DVD set that cost $100 per season!! WAY too much. It is now around $50 per season which sounds more affordable but still a bit prohibitive... I only have like two seasons so far...) Another reason I might download movies is the fact that they are otherwise not available to me in any other way. Take for example, the Disney Classic "The Song of the South." Disney will no longer publish the work and actively seeks its removal from public hands. Another example is foreign films which I would certainly have no problem buying from foreign suppliers except for the asinine price-control mechanism known as "region coding." So I can't get movies from Japan without a lot of work to make use of it. Buying would be a LOT more convenient if only it were made available. But one reality is that I cannot speak for everyone that copies content any more than anyone else. But I can claim that my position is one held by quite a few others and I wouldn't be surprised if that group were the majority of consumers.
I might guess that you are directly involved in an intellectual property oriented business given your history of comments and so it it would make sense that you might find the majority of the consumer side of things rather annoying. (I would guess perhaps you are in the software development business?) But the fact is you can't change the majority of people and you certainly can't fight them and expect to win. The more push giv
... no one cares if you take a book from the shelf, sit down in one of the comfortable chairs and read as much of the book as you like.
They may let you, but I bet they also care if you do that rather than buy it.
There is a magical mystical place where they not only don't care if you read the books they spend money on getting you to come in and do that. Not only that but they let you take the book home to read, so long as you bring it back soon, all hail the "library".
It must be nice to live in a country where the biggest political issue is made by a bunch of people that want to leech free software.
A++, would read again!
Also, it's great that of all people it's artists from the one nation the Russians refused selling their bombers because they were afraid the Chinese would copy them. Gotta love that.
Got a link for that?
And judges in Denmark has already punished people who *LINKED* to mp3s from their homepages.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
There is a threshold for getting into the Swedish parliament; Wikipedia says it's 4 percent of the national vote. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Sweden#Elections
Civil disobedience is what people naturally do in the face of bad law. The fact that you seem to have read in "principled activists" into what I said shows that you are not arguing on what people say, but rather what people didn't say.
Well, I don't understand your distinction between "civil disobedience" and "principled activist". It seems to me that you were trying to cast piracy into a lofty light, and I know pirates deserve to get knocked off their high-horse.
You are quite the troll based on your comment history.
If by "troll" you mean I say things that you disagree with, and I like to point out that pirates don't have high-minded intellectual or philosophical reasons for piracy - despite their efforts to cast themselves in a positive light, then, yes, I am a "troll". One of my biggest gripes is with pirates who like to claim they have legitimacy. At least if you're going to pirate something, have the decency to feel guilty about it.
I say that copyright (and indeed, intellectual property law in general... Mickey Mouse was supposed to be public domain by now!) goes too far
Okay, copyright goes too far. It's the next step you take that I disagree with.
nothing will stop pirates from "stealing." It is irrelevant. The reason why is because it is completely different from the argument I was making. There will ALWAYS be some copying and sharing. The industry and the legislators need to accept it.
I think there's a big gap between "I gave this copy to my friend" and "I shared this copy with a million anonymous people on the internet". From a practical standpoint, the second one is far more damaging to creators.
As it stands, publishers are making MORE than enough profit from what they are doing and they were making lots of profit before all these draconian laws and technologies were introduced. The simple problem I see is excessive greed and abuse on the publisher's side.
I've seen lots of publishers and IP-based companies go bankrupt. Further, companies want to get paid "what they're worth". Copyright law sets up an agreement between the creator and producer - the consumer has two choices: (1) Pay for this content and get a copy, or (2) don't pay for this content and don't get a copy. If the consumer decides the content is more valuable than the money they'll pay for it, then they buy it. The consumer and the creator both win. Piracy says, "Getting the content is no longer contingent on paying for it". As a result, lots of people benefit from the content without paying the creator. The creator now feels slighted for not getting paid "what he's worth". If the creator is making a ton of money, then the market dictates that it will attract competition (because if you're making $10 off of every $1 you invest, everyone will want to jump in and make the same kind of profit). Competition then drives down costs.
Another reason I might download movies is the fact that they are otherwise not available to me in any other way. Take for example, the Disney Classic "The Song of the South." Disney will no longer publish the work and actively seeks its removal from public hands. Another example is foreign films which I would certainly have no problem buying from foreign suppliers except for the asinine price-control mechanism known as "region coding." So I can't get movies from Japan without a lot of work to make use of it.
Honestly, I'm not going to be all that judgmental over that kind of piracy. The problem is that I don't think most piracy falls into that category.
To be clear and exact, "pirating" media means making illegal copies for SALE to others. Without that profit motive, there is no piracy.
Changing definitions of words in the middle of a thread seems like an evasive tactic. Besides, if piracy is "illegal copies for SALE", then why do you think "Pirate Bay" and "Pirate Party" have the word "Pirate" in their names? Are they advocating the selling of copyrigh
In my local Fair Copyright group we have debated whether it's reasonable to describe a Canadian DMCA as "criminalizing everyday Canadians." In legal jargon, the meaning of the term "criminal" is quite specific, and does not include most copyright infringement. However, in regular English the meaning of "criminal" is broader, including most lawbreaking regardless of whether it is civil or criminal in a legal sense. Lawyers don't get to change the meaning of English words just because they have need of detailed technical jargon. Your response to my argument suggests that this argument holds water. Most people are not lawyers: for them, the legal distinction is irrelevant - criminal simply means illegal. This is something I need to know. I want to make clear and effective arguments without being deceptive.