Pirate Party Unites In Australia

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pirate Party Unites In Australia

Posted by kdawson on Monday September 28, 2009 @09:13PM from the arrrr-no-worries dept.

bennyboy64 writes "iTnews reports that the Pirate Party has opened a branch office in Australia and is recruiting office bearers and supporters. The group updated the Australian website it registered last year and advertised for a president, treasurer, secretary, and supporting positions. A party spokesman, Rodney Serkowski, said the group was close to establishing a beachhead in Australia. He said that with 300 supporters it was on its way to signing the 500 it needed to become an official Australian political party. 'We are currently an online community, working together with the intention of becoming a registered party, and we're coming closer to reaching that goal,' Serkowski said. 'If we can get the required 500 members, and be registered by year's end, I think it is highly probable that we will contest the next Federal election in Australia.' At the weekend about two percent of Germans voted for the Pirate Party, although it needed five percent to gain a seat in the Bundestag."

173 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

hooray by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:21 · Score: 0

politics that excites people!
I like the labour goverment (with only one uber right wing govt for 12 years prior to compare with its hard not to) but i'd be happy to support a party that can potentially drag politics in general slightly to the left and present a few new ideas.
GL pirate party au
1. Re:hooray by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:24 · Score: 0
  
  POO CRAP BUM!
In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:22 · Score: 4, Informative

During the elections on Germany the Pirate Party there could rake in 2% of all the votes: almost a million people voted for them! Kudos, and keep going!.
1. Re:In other news.. by MichaelSmith · 2009-09-28 22:59 · Score: 1
  
  During the elections on Germany the Pirate Party there could rake in 2% of all the votes: almost a million people voted for them! Kudos, and keep going!.
  Any party can get 2% of the votes by favouring things which the other parties oppose. One nation regularly got 5% in Australia by doing this.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
2. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 23:23 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  The numbers prove you wrong.
  There were 27 parties in total, some with agendas far from the mainstream (i.e. "things which other parties oppose"). The Pirate Party was the one with the highest votes among the non-established parties, even beating the radical nationalists, which is quite significant.
  Background note: In German federal elections, parties need to gain at least 5% of the votes (or gain at least three direct seats) in order to properly participate in parliament. Therefore some voters shy away from "wasting" their votes on small parties. It's kind of a chicken and egg dilemma - if a party doesn't already have many voters, your vote effectively doesn't count.
3. Re:In other news.. by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 23:42 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Any party can get 2% of the votes by favouring things which the other parties oppose.
  There were over a dozen parties on the ballot that couldn't.
4. Re:In other news.. by MichaelSmith · 2009-09-28 23:52 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Yeah but lots of parties don't even try to get votes. For example here there are parties for Christians, divorced fathers who don't want to pay child support, and the gun lobby who never get a significant vote.
  The Pirate Party is a bit more like One Nation because they have a fairly open, vague policy platform. If they find out that in one place there are votes for opposing music festival (they won't let us pirate our music!) they will run on that in that place. Elsewhere the issue might be caps on internet downloads or something. You can drum up votes that way but you can't build a national platform.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
5. Re:In other news.. by ArsenneLupin · 2009-09-29 00:25 · Score: 1
  
  Background note: In German federal elections, parties need to gain at least 5% of the votes (or gain at least three direct seats) in order to properly participate in parliament. Therefore some voters shy away from "wasting" their votes on small parties. It's kind of a chicken and egg dilemma - if a party doesn't already have many voters, your vote effectively doesn't count.
  Same as in the US: In US presidential elections, candidates need to gain at least 50% of the votes, in order to properly gain the seat. Therefore some voters shy away from "wasting" their votes on third party candidates. It's kind of a chicken and egg dilemma - if a party isn't already among the top 2, your vote effectively doesn't count.
6. Re:In other news.. by maxwell+demon · 2009-09-29 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  During the elections on Germany the Pirate Party there could rake in 2% of all the votes: almost a million people voted for them! Kudos, and keep going!.
  Actually, 845.904 did, according to the preliminary official result. Note that the relevant votes here are the "Zweitstimmen" ("second vote"), as those determine how many people (if any) a party may send to parliament (well, that's not completely true, but the differences are only relevant if the party has larger support, and will be changed anyway because the current ruling has been declared unconstitutional by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (federal constitution court)).
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
7. Re:In other news.. by maxwell+demon · 2009-09-29 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  That's not completely comparable, because the German 5% threshold is for all of Germany. So it doesn't help if the party has more than 50% in a single voting district, if the nation-wide count is still below 5% of all votes. There's an exception if some party gets the absolute majority in at least three voting districts (but the votes used for that are different than the votes used for the 5% threshold).
  OTOH, the 5% threshold also means that your vote may have an effect even if the party you voted for doesn't get into the parliament: Since it increases the total number of votes, it decreases the percentage of the other parties. So if a party would be otherwise just above the 5% threshold, additional votes for any other party, including for those with no chance to get into parliament, may put that party below 5%. In other words, you cannot just vote a party into the parliament, you can also vote it out of the parliament.
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
8. Re:In other news.. by walshy007 · 2009-09-29 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  and the gun lobby who never get a significant vote.
  This is unfortunate, the shooter's party's policies are rather nice, everyone assumes you have to be a gun nut to support them.. but all they really want is the government to butt out of what people like to do in their recreational lives.
9. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 02:31 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Same as in the US
  Hell no, not at all. There are two votes in each German federal election. The first vote is about electing a majority candidate to represent your district in parliament - which certainly resembles the US "winner-takes-it-all" system, but on a finer scale as about 299 seats in parliament are assigned that way. The second vote is about electing a party (usually) nationwide, which is where the Pirate Party gained 2% of the share. This vote gives all parties with more than 5% of the votes a proportional share of another 299 seats.
  The important difference is that with the German system it's much much more likely for a small party to be represented in parliament. In the US however, third parties have essentially no chance whatsoever.
10. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 02:34 · Score: 0
  
  No one cares about your opinion you furry faggot, go back to pretending to molest children on Tapestries.
11. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 03:04 · Score: 0
  
  The president does not need 50% of the votes to get elected, they need the majority.
  See Clinton when he was elected. It was a 'scandal' because he only received 43% of the popular vote, with a short lead on Bush (elder), and Perot taking a fair stake for an independent. Ralph Nader would have a wet dream thinking of the numbers Perot put up.
  Clinton won the 1992 presidential election (43.0% of the vote) against Republican incumbent George H. W. Bush (37.4% of the vote) and billionaire populist Ross Perot, who ran as an independent (18.9% of the vote)
12. Re:In other news.. by V+for+Vendetta · 2009-09-29 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Also, don't underestimate the 2%. First, as already mentioned here, that's the most votes of the "did not make it into parliament" parties.
  Second, this election was the first election for national parliament (Bundestag) the PIRATEN ever participated. Convincing 2% of the voters to cast their vote for them is an impressing result. For comparision: the nowadays well established Green Party received 1.2% on their first try.
  And last, although 5% is the threshold for entering parliament, financial compensation for the election campaign starts earlier (0.5%, if I'm not mistaken). Money they can put into good use to stay "in the press" for the next four years.
Freedom is born where oppression reigns by BadAnalogyGuy · 2009-09-28 21:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

If the U.S. doesn't want its own Piratpartiet, the government had better consider that the reason these branch offices have popped up is precisely because of heavy-handed laws that attempt to usurp the inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet.
Any action against Net Neutrality, for one, will be one step towards establishing a Pirate Party here at home. Any action that tries to legislate morality on the internet will be one step towards a viable Pirate Party third party. The only real chance legislators have in the U.S. of stopping the growth of the Pirate Party here is ironically to embrace the tenets of the Pirate Party and implement the freedom of information it espouses.
Princess Leia once put it very succinctly, "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
1. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by cjfs · 2009-09-28 21:36 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The only real chance legislators have in the U.S. of stopping the growth of the Pirate Party here is ironically to embrace the tenets of the Pirate Party and implement the freedom of information it espouses.
  Which is exactly what the goal of the party should be. They'll never form a government, but by bringing attention to the issues they can do a world of good. When you see the major parties imitating your policy, you haven't obsoleted yourself, you've won.
2. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by zwei2stein · 2009-09-28 21:37 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  ... inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet ...
  All bet are on ...
  +5 Insigtfull
  -5 Troll
  +5 Funny
  ?
  
  --
  -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
3. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by ciderVisor · 2009-09-28 21:47 · Score: 1
  
  Clue: check the user name. FWIW, I think his posts are great.
  
  --
  Squirrel!
4. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by cjfs · 2009-09-28 21:48 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  ... inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet ...
  Notice how the article takes the same outlook, it goes from "change the landscape of Australian politics by advocating fairer copyright, freer culture and ensuring the protection of civil liberties, sending a strong message to Mr Conroy that his censorship scheme is not welcome in Australia" to six paragraphs on getting free music.
  The challenge is to inform the public that file sharing is only one part of one issue. Hopefully the AU pirate party can stay on message and educate people there's much more to be concerned about.
5. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by antifoidulus · 2009-09-28 22:05 · Score: 1
  
  By your logic, since the Greens in the US got less than 1% of the presidential vote in 1996, then got over 300% more votes in 2000, by 2012 they should be dominating the US political landscape..... Single-issue parties, though on occasion successful, rarely get more than the people that feel really passionate about their issue to vote for them.
  
  --
  Monstar L
6. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 22:12 · Score: 0
  
  It really doesn't matter whether there is a pirate party or not in the US, because of US electoral system. The US is essentially an oligarchic system that was built with the roman empire in mind, it is not a democracy in the modern sense although it allows for the occasional shifting of power from one elite to another.
7. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by theTerribleRobbo · 2009-09-28 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  Australia has recently passed laws that make it possible to outlaw groups of people; that is, if you're deemed by the police to be a member of said group, you're breaking the law. It was used against a bikie gang to begin with, but no-one has any idea how this may... seep into other things.
  How long until this group gets outlawed for Encouraging Rampant Copyright Infringement or something ridiculous?
  (We have no constitutionally-upheld Free Speech law/clause/amendment/anything here, which doesn't help matters.)
8. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 22:39 · Score: 1
  
  If the U.S. doesn't want its own Piratpartiet, the government had better consider that the reason these branch offices have popped up is precisely because of heavy-handed laws that attempt to usurp the inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet.
  The two large parties in the US can safely ignore any attempts at getting a Pirate party up and running. The election system there will make sure that such a party stays insignificant. Winner takes all and such.
9. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by IBBoard · 2009-09-28 22:43 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Hopefully the AU pirate party can stay on message and educate people there's much more to be concerned about.
  How much of the general public is going to listen beyond the "free music" point? If you say your party politics revolve around "copyright changes that would allow them to download music for free, implementing fairer copyright terms, ensuring political civil liberties and protecting against censorship" then all they'll hear is "copyright blah blah blah download music for free, blah blah blah blah blah".
  The majority of people don't care about the more important values that could be the focus of these policies, they just care about getting something for nothing and not having a potential law suit or internet connection threat hanging over them.
10. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Rogerborg · 2009-09-28 23:05 · Score: 1
  
  heavy-handed laws that attempt to usurp the inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet.
  Why y'all be hating on the Klingons? It'll only lead to the Klingon Power Party stealing votes away from the Pirate Party.
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
11. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by MichaelSmith · 2009-09-28 23:11 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  As freedom loving descendent of criminals all Australians will...
  (sees new iPod)
  Oh Shiny!
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
12. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Arkem+Beta · 2009-09-28 23:19 · Score: 1
  
  This is interesting to me, do you have a link about the illegal groups thing?
  
  Australians do have a "constitutionally upheld" right to free speech according to the High Court, see http://www.aph.gov.au/LIBRARY/Pubs/RN/2001-02/02rn42.htm for details. While the ruling isn't as broad as the the US 1st Amendment it still provides freedom of political communication. With this ruling it would be difficult for any Australian law to outlaw a political party.
13. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Kjella · 2009-09-28 23:25 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  +5 Funny
  ...for suggesting the Democans and Republicrats have anything to fear in a first-past-the-post system. Or maybe "+5, Sad truth" but that's not a moderation. Europe is the big threat, because to *briefly* try to describe ~30 different political landscapes most have proportional representation, a 4-5% lower limit, a big socialist block, a big conservative block and some smaller parties. These smaller parties can be both between the blocks (greens, christians, liberals) and extreme left/right wing parties.
  This will very often lead to a distribution from left to right something like 5-35-20-35-5, one major party on each side who's looking to gather some adjoining parties for a coalition. Here's a very central point - it's not so that each side will necessarily want all their "own" parties in it. For example, many extreme right parties are shunned by the rest of the right side - they'll rather look to the center. This means that if you can get past the 4% and be in the center, you're very attractive. It's often easier for the big parties to swallow making some environmental or social policy changes than cooperating with the extremes, that has a price of its own.
  That said, it's not so easy to start a new party in Europe either, even though it's easier in the US. Since there are more parties, they also tend to shift more trying to close up gaps of voters that aren't satisfied. Already you see a lot of parties moving in towards the Pirate Party trying to keep enough voters away so that it won't pass the limit. It's usually many years between a new party enters the parliament, the last round was really the greens.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
14. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Philip_the_physicist · 2009-09-29 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  I assume the GP is referring to the federal counter-terrorism laws and South Australia's anti-bikie laws.
15. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by zach_the_lizard · 2009-09-29 00:07 · Score: 1
  
  inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet.
  I disagree that downloading content for free from the Internet is a right. However, I would say that there is no right to be granted a legal monopoly on the production of any item, physical or not. This in effect makes the result the same, that users would be capable of downloading whatever they can get access to, but it is a possibly large disagreement on why they can do this.
  
  I wonder about a system wherein copyright is not automatic or even guaranteed, a system where each producer of IP (say, an artist) establishes a contract that has a clause prohibiting the copying of the IP in question. It would be very hard to enforce, and likely not work in practice, but is has the benefit that the only people who can be charged with anything are those who agreed to and broke the contract. And then it would be a contract violation, a situation in which I feel judges are less likely to issue mega fines for copying music.
  
  --
  SSC
16. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by quenda · 2009-09-29 00:29 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  In Australia when the iPod was released there was no legal way to get popular music for it.
  There was no iTunes or equivalent here, and it was illegal to copy your own CD collection. Yet iPod and other mp3 players sold like hotcakes.
  Just like copying your CD to tape to play in the car was illegal. Time-shift recording on your VCR was illegal.
  But nobody gave a damn. The laws have changed a little since, but since thy were never enforced, few people noticed.
  So frankly, and sadly, I don't see the Pirate party getting much attention.
17. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 00:34 · Score: 0
  
  Germany has had a similiar law for ages (Â129a StGb). Left-/right-/islamist-extremist groups have been opposing the law, naturally. While I see the problems that can arise from such a law, German judges have been very careful when using it. This might change so we need to constantly watch how it is used. But I have no pity for small train-derailing, foreigner-smashing, hate-mongering groups that get punished by this law.
18. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by thomasw_lrd · 2009-09-29 00:40 · Score: 0
  
  Unfortunately, the US political system doesn't care whether they can get a measly 2% or even 10% of the vote. Only 51% matters.
  
  --
  21st Century Renaissance Man
19. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by rohan972 · 2009-09-29 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  Single-issue parties, though on occasion successful, rarely get more than the people that feel really passionate about their issue to vote for them.
  When that issue is don't get sued for downloading you might be surprised how many would vote for it. Australians in general aren't very politically aware. I doubt that 10% could give you any sort of reasonable explanation of what a free market is, or what socialism is. Downloading without risk is potentially something that many, particularly under 30's, would consider a more compelling reason to vote than something obscure (to them) like policy on deficits, privatisation etc.
  
  I know a man who was the regional president of one of our political parties, he could not give you an accurate description of our countries political development or where the concepts in our constitution come from though he could tell you a great deal about who is in power now. The ideology behind the differing political movements is lost on most people, even those involved in them.
  
  --
  http://marriedmansexlife.com/
20. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by I_Voter · 2009-09-29 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  I am not claiming that forming a new political party in the U.S. is necessarily a bad idea. However, people should be aware of, what I believe, since the early 1900's, is the "exceptional" nature of political parties in the U.S..
  Can You Define What a Political Party is?
  
  I_Voter
  
  Wld U vote 4 a candidate that fails to mention if any other candidate agrees w/ them on a single (specific) issue!
  See some: Modern U.S. attempts at realistic party platforms.
21. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by dangitman · 2009-09-29 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Any action against Net Neutrality, for one, will be one step towards establishing a Pirate Party here at home. Any action that tries to legislate morality on the internet will be one step towards a viable Pirate Party third party. The only real chance legislators have in the U.S. of stopping the growth of the Pirate Party here is ironically to embrace the tenets of the Pirate Party and implement the freedom of information it espouses.
  So, you're saying that the US should be more draconian about establishing morality laws for the internet?
  
  --
  ... and then they built the supercollider.
22. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Runaway1956 · 2009-09-29 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm-hmmm. "Free Musicz for EVERYONE!" is a good soundbite. It's enough to persuade the average voter after all.
  For that matter, nearly half of the music produced since about 1900 SHOULD BE in the public domain. With reasonable copyright law, much of what the record labels claim to "own" would be completely free, and completely legal to download, as well as legal to distribute by any means.
  Let's be less than generous with the "content providers". 15 years for copyright. Face it - every extension beyond that limit has been bought and paid for by lobbyists. Greedy, money grubbing, crooked lobbyists with deep, deep pockets.
  "Mr. Himmler, your race is awfully close, and your senate seat is in question. We can infuse 12 million dollars into your campaign, if you'll endorse copyright extensions for us."
  "Is that legal, Mr. Lobbbyist?"
  "Certainly not, Mr. Himmler, but we can launder the money - we have a network in place for things like this. It will cost us an additional million or so, but we can pump 12 million into your campaign tomorrow!"
  "Well, I'm sold, Mr. Lobbyist, and I mean that literally. What's more, once I'm sold, I stay sold!"
  Look at the history of copyright law. And, look at the money. Always, follow the money.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
23. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by jbezorg · 2009-09-29 02:04 · Score: 1
  
  How much of the general public is going to listen beyond the "free music" point? If you say your party politics revolve around "copyright changes that would allow them to download music for free, implementing fairer copyright terms, ensuring political civil liberties and protecting against censorship" then all they'll hear is "copyright blah blah blah download music for free, blah blah blah blah blah".
  Plus, calling the organization "The Pirate Party" probably doesn't help people get past the "copyright blah blah blah download music for free, blah blah blah blah blah" part either.
  
  --
  I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
24. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Ihlosi · 2009-09-29 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  Let's be less than generous with the "content providers". 15 years for copyright.
  Let's be even more generous: 20 years. Just like for patents.
  The way it is now, if I invent a gizmo that brings about world peace, general happiness, and has the answer to life, the universe, and everything, I can profit from it, and maybe my kids can, too. If I write a song, then my grandkids or even my great-grandkids can still reap the benefits. That doesn't make sense.
25. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by wtfamidoinghere · 2009-09-29 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  While you say you can see the problems that can arise from such law, surprisingly you don't see that laws like this are completely redundant and unneeded. Many would agree with you that those groups of individuals you mention should get no pity, and should be handled by the law; but they should be punished for train-derailing, or for foreigner-smashing, or for hate-mongering ... not by being labeled a "terrist group" or something similar. These laws, while adding too little, can bring all sorts of wrongs within.
26. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by IBBoard · 2009-09-29 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  For that matter, nearly half of the music produced since about 1900 SHOULD BE in the public domain. With reasonable copyright law, much of what the record labels claim to "own" would be completely free, and completely legal to download, as well as legal to distribute by any means.
  And how much interest will there be in original recordings of songs from the 20s, 30s, 40s, etc? People either want new takes on old songs (which would be under new copyright) or they want new junk that has been mass-produced, in general. Teens are probably the ones with least disposable income, and they're probably the ones most likely to pirate, but they're also the ones most likely to want the latest songs that are going to be under any copyright term's length.
  I've yet to work out where the sweet spot is for copyright. It obviously shouldn't be too long, because why should an artist record one track once and live off it forever by going back and getting more and more fees, but at the same time there needs to be something to stop people just ripping off someone else's work and claiming it as their own once the period ends. It's the one area that Open Source needs as well that anti-copyright groups ignore - the GPL relies on copyright, so too much messing with that and big corporations can treat GPL code like BSD and public domain code without any recourse for us getting their source code.
27. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by PeterBrett · 2009-09-29 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  I've yet to work out where the sweet spot is for copyright.
  About 14 years, apparently.
  
  --
  Pirate Party UK
28. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Ihlosi · 2009-09-29 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  And how much interest will there be in original recordings of songs from the 20s, 30s, 40s, etc?
  It's not just about original recordings. The songs themselves would be public domain, meaning that anyone could perform them, etc.
29. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Runaway1956 · 2009-09-29 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  There really are some people still listening to music from the 1920's. Not a lot, but some people enjoy it.
  But, what about the 1950's? Even the 1960's? I said about half of the music produced since 1900 - but let's realize that much of what has been "produced" in recent decades are nothing more than remakes of old music. Let's allow FEAT to collect royalties on their remakes - but personally, I'd rather listen to the artists that they are mimicking.
  The "sweet spot" has to be between 10 and 20 years. Personally, I can live with either of those numbers, and anything in between. 25 years is simply to much. Any claims to copyright beyond 20 years are the result of pure unbridled greed. No working stiff reaps the rewards of his labors 20 years after he completes his work. It's time for artists of all sorts to get in touch with reality - we don't owe them a life of leisure for ever after they create something cool.
  It's much more important that the entertainment industries get in touch with reality. We cannot, we will not support their lame asses for eternity just because they have vaults with documents and original recordings in them.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
30. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Ihlosi · 2009-09-29 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  But, what about the 1950's?
  Just imagine how much more variety there would be in Three Dogs selection of music if they didn't have to license all those songs for Fallout 3 ...
31. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Runaway1956 · 2009-09-29 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Kinda off subject, maybe, but the US and Oz aren't all that terribly different. The American colonies had their share of convicts and/or people running from persecution, or outlaws dodging court dates etc. A large number of "bond servants" helped to settle our colonies. Who, exactly, were bond servants? People bought out of debtor's prison, people facing debtor's prison, scoundrels avoiding debts that might be coming due. Someone who was actually interested in the subject could probably write a thesis on the subject, "What motivated American immigrants to come to America?"
  Oh yeah, we had our share.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
32. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Wildclaw · 2009-09-29 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  About 14 years, apparently.
  A bullshit number of course. There is simply no accurate way to evaluating neither the positive nor negative effects of copyright and patents. And that is before taking into considering stuff like fair use, legal private copying or compulsory licensing. All of which have been tried in different forms in different countries.
  From a pure societal economic perspective, copyright is probably best at zero years. Even if less media gets produced (an assumption in itself), letting the whole population have access to everything that has ever been created unmeasurable huge economic benefits. Not the least that you don't have to deal with it in the first place, which creates new levels of freedom. (just like legal private copying makes citizens more free in a real sense)
  From a more balanced perspective, I am extremely skeptic of any copyright length over 10 years, and I consider even that quite long. If you can't make a profit over that many years, then you simply suck at business. Of course, there are always a few arguments brought up.
  After X years, the big companies could come in and scope up unknown works and make profits with them. To which I answer. Yes, they could. And really, they should. If you suck so badly at distributing your own work, then society doesn't have any use of your services. Of course, as it will no longer be under copyright, they can't really profit that much. Another argument is that people will wait until it runs out of copyright. But then I just have to wonder. People in general simply don't have the patience to wait years for something to run out of copyright. Which leads to the final argument, that old works will compete with the new ones. To which I say, damn right!! If the old works are good enough to satisfy everyone, then we don't need any new ones produced and are better off allocating the workforce elsewhere.
33. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2009-09-29 02:50 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  You're right. I guess me and anyone else who has ever appreciated commercial culture is doomed to dry and desolate "whenever I fucking feel like it" culture. Oh well, it was nice while we had it.
  
  --
  You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
34. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by PeterBrett · 2009-09-29 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  A bullshit number of course. There is simply no accurate way to evaluating neither the positive nor negative effects of copyright and patents. And that is before taking into considering stuff like fair use, legal private copying or compulsory licensing. All of which have been tried in different forms in different countries.
  Why don't you READ THE PAPER before passing your omniscient judgement upon it from on high? Perhaps it would be too difficult to actually provide relevant criticism of the author's methods and research?
  Objectively speaking, there's no accurate way to measure anything. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't try. The only sensible way to make policy is to gather evidence, evaluate the evidence in the light of a critical assessment of the processes used to gather it, and then to use the evidence to support the proposed changes.
  
  From a pure societal economic perspective, copyright is probably best at zero years. Even if less media gets produced (an assumption in itself), letting the whole population have access to everything that has ever been created unmeasurable huge economic benefits. Not the least that you don't have to deal with it in the first place, which creates new levels of freedom. (just like legal private copying makes citizens more free in a real sense)
  From a more balanced perspective, I am extremely skeptic of any copyright length over 10 years, and I consider even that quite long. If you can't make a profit over that many years, then you simply suck at business. Of course, there are always a few arguments brought up.
  Hand-waving like this is not the way to formulate policy, despite the fact that so many politicians think it is.
  
  --
  Pirate Party UK
35. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by nawitus · 2009-09-29 03:36 · Score: 1
  
  The "democracy" of the U.S. does not make an American pirate party possible (to be elected).
36. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by TheNoxx · 2009-09-29 04:07 · Score: 1
  
  heavy-handed laws that attempt to usurp the inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet.
  Feeling a little over-entitled, perhaps?
  
  --
  Ex nihilo nihil fit.
37. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by V+for+Vendetta · 2009-09-29 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  Keep in mind, that in Germany parties get comepensated for their elections campaign from taxes. This is to prevent the situation that only the "rich ones" could make themselves prominent and get voted into parliament. Knowning that, you won't sponsor parties with the tax payer's money which openly admit to destroy that very society which is sponsoring them.
38. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by kalirion · 2009-09-29 04:18 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Does the U.S. have an official Illegal Alien Party? Stoner Party? Sex Offender Party? Highway Speeder Party? Seems to me that if we made political parties over every group of laws a large portion of the population does not like, copyright would be far down the list.
39. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Wildclaw · 2009-09-29 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  Why don't you READ THE PAPER before passing your omniscient judgement upon it from on high? Perhaps it would be too difficult to actually provide relevant criticism of the author's methods and research?
  OK. I did. And my conclusion remain the same. The 14 year number is bullshit. Not in that is 100% wrong. It just happens to be the standard journalistic bullshit.
  Of course, the author never even uses it in the paper, which you would have known if you had actually read it. My criticism was never at the author, but at the number itself. Which is just the usual kind of journalistic distortion of truth. Not something new. You see it again and again, with journalists latching on to numbers that have no meaning by them self. And if the number sounds nice (like being the original US copyright length), some fools will propagate it like it is the single truth. (The funny thing is that you wouldn't get the same number if you used the formula back in the days, as the parameter values of the formula would be different)
  Also, I don't see what bad critique I had in my post. I started by saying that there is no way to evaluate accurately the best length of copyright. And considering the margin of error in the paper, I am definitely right on that one. I continued by saying that length is not all that constitutes copyright, and that other factors would change the optimal length. I see nothing in the essay that would contradict that.
  Then I continued with an opinionated assertion regarding the zero year phenomena where you get special properties as there is a big jump between no law and some law. I didn't read the essay in enough detail to see if it discussed that, but I don't think so. In that case, it is a valid remark. The difference between free and almost free is a very interesting economic subject, as there are many special properties there.
  Next, I gave my perspective of balance. I agree that it isn't as well researched and mathematically interesting as his paper. I simply base my estimate on observations about the general turnaround of products on the market, noting that most businesses plan to get their expenditure back within a few years, after which it gets written off. But to add some real criticism against the paper. I found that it relies too much on real world data, that in itself is dependent on the current copyright system. That could easily cause a feedback that can create chaotic (as in math) distortions in the application of the formula.
  Finally, I ended with a few common answers to complaint from those who want to keep the long copyright. Which I guess didn't have anything to do with the paper. I just felt like writing it, as it was on topic.
40. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 06:36 · Score: 0
  
  There is a Pirate Party of the United States, but it doesn't seem to have really taken off. I don't known whether it's due to bad organization or that it's really hard for a new party to have any influence in the U.S. system. Perhaps forming action groups withing the major parties would be more effective.
41. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by westlake · 2009-09-29 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  ... inalienable rights of users to download content for free off the internet ...
  All bet are on ...
  +5 Insightful
  -5 Troll
  +5 Funny
  You forgot the Bonus Point for the quote from Star Wars.
  The geek's inalienable right to a free movie fix has always struck me as the ultimate in middle class entitlements. It means absolutely nothing if you can't afford a mid-line PC and broadband service.
42. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Stray7Xi · 2009-09-29 07:11 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Illegal Aliens and Sex Offenders can't vote
  Stoners are a subset of libertarians
  People want to speed but they also want speeding laws.
  Really "pirate" platform is an argument about freedom and ownership rights. It's a lot more philosophical then wanting to break a law, it's an argument that the law is morally wrong. It's closer to the Gun Control vs NRA or Abortion prior to Roe v Wade.
43. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by kalirion · 2009-09-29 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  Sex Offenders can't vote
  So if you're caught urinating on the side of a tree, they revoke your right to vote?
44. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by smoker2 · 2009-09-29 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  THEY called us pirates. We are the recognition of proper copyright terms party. Should we allow the opposition to slag us off and re-designate our objectives, just to swing the vote ? Lies, lies and more lies ?
  Don't you realise that when you recognise one lie as being valid, you open the floodgates ? Stand up and be counted. If you think copyright is being abused by the incumbents, say so, or forever doom the rest of us. Don't equivocate and hang around at the the outskirts - make your stand. Whichever way you lean.
45. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by Eil · 2009-09-29 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  The only real chance legislators have in the U.S. of stopping the growth of the Pirate Party here is ironically to embrace the tenets of the Pirate Party and implement the freedom of information it espouses.
  No, their best chance would be to establish and entrench a two-party winner-take-all system that deliberately excludes all meaningful third-party participation in both local and national politics.
  (For those who didn't get the cynicism: a Pirate Party in the U.S. would be utterly fruitless since we have no such thing as proportional representation. Our election system as it currently exists is designed such that the people can only choose between the lesser or two evils.)
46. Re:Freedom is born where oppression reigns by uninformedLuddite · 2009-09-29 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  These laws were knocked down as unconstitutional in South Australia.
  
  --
  The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Website link by bbqsrc · 2009-09-28 21:22 · Score: 5, Informative

The website link is here. :)

--
Disagree != mod troll.
1. Re:Website link by bbqsrc · 2009-09-28 21:30 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Also, sorry to reply to myself, but incase the site goes down, irc://irc.piratpartiet.se/#PPAu That's our IRC.
  
  --
  Disagree != mod troll.
Yarr by acehole · 2009-09-28 21:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

I signed up as a supporter. If you're Australian and involved in IT so should you. Even if you're not but care about censorship and IP related issues, sign up. Dont let people whose policies are dictated by industries who only have how much profit they can squeeze out as their only lobbyists on such issues.
Help fight for your own rights, dont rely on others to do the work for you. Its time, step up.
Sign up! Sign up! Sign up!

--
Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
1. Re:Yarr by Andy_R · 2009-09-28 21:40 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  ...and if you are not in Australia, sign up to your local party!
  The Pirate Party will only become a major force in politics if people are prepared to put in the time, effort and cash needed to make it work. Here in the Pirate Party UK, we are facing a huge challenge to raise enough money to put up a significant number of candidates in the next general election. We have 650 constituencies, each requiring a £500 deposit before we can give voters the chance to vote pirate.
  
  --
  A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
2. Re:Yarr by BadAnalogyGuy · 2009-09-28 21:44 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Couldn't you just pay with ten double-sided copies of 50GBP notes?
3. Re:Yarr by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:56 · Score: 0
  
  10:15am May 2nd, 2018
  Committee Chairman: You have been brought before the House Committee on Unamerican Activities to ask you are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Pirate Party. Do you sympathize with the goals of the Pirate Party?
4. Re:Yarr by Barny · 2009-09-28 22:35 · Score: 1
  
  "You can take our freedom, but you can never take, OUR LIVES!"
  Err, wait...
  
  --
  ...
  /me sighs
5. Re:Yarr by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 23:39 · Score: 0
  
  Having signed up, I also advise getting onto the IRC (#ppau at irc.piratpartiet.se). I'm a 23-year old australian IT worker with a degree in computer science, and it's a real eye-opener to see how many people local to me have the same opinions about copyright and freedom...while still managing to be reasonable and logical about it.
  Even in university, I didn't come across any groups that gelled so well with my opinions and feelings. They have my support so far, and I hope they'll continue the same way in the future.
6. Re:Yarr by ArsenneLupin · 2009-09-29 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  Or pay with whatever you find in the strongbox of one of the ships foolish enough to sail Somali waters...
7. Re:Yarr by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  Why would I support the right of others to use my work without permisson?
8. Re:Yarr by wtfamidoinghere · 2009-09-29 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  If you don't want others to "use" your work, keep it to yourself! Lock it and throw away the key. Everybody "uses" work from others, or do you come up with your "work" completely out of the void?
9. Re:Yarr by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  Have you thought about what your plan would do to the progress of science / art / technology?
10. Re:Yarr by wtfamidoinghere · 2009-09-29 02:45 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Yes. All of those went fine without copyright for centuries, thank you very much, specially art, wich seems to be the more controversial one lately. Granted, much less grand-grand-sons would continue to profit from work they never did, but I really have no sympathy for them.
11. Re:Yarr by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps, just perhaps, being assured some level of protection is responsible for some of the large investments required to make our current science / tech work? Do you think Intel would spend so much on R&D if anyone could simply copy their work? And plenty of art is available for free, why not download it instead?
12. Re:Yarr by wtfamidoinghere · 2009-09-29 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I could agree with you. If the world was as sane and balanced as you color it, I'm sure we all could agree on some sort of balanced system. But you know damn well, contrary to your soft words, that it's none of that, it's completely shifted towards big protection and even bigger and insane restrictions.
  Perhaps, just perhaps, if the level of protection was really intended to be fair and not to fill up large multinational and individual pockets, much more people could benefit from the advances in science / tech. Do you think Intel would simply cease to exist if the laws were more balanced? Again, who do you think invents / develops / creates out of the void?
13. Re:Yarr by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 06:07 · Score: 0
  
  It's Australia, so wouldn't that be "rraY"?
14. Re:Yarr by trawg · 2009-09-29 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  Even if you're not but care about censorship and IP related issues, sign up. Dont let people whose policies are dictated by industries who only have how much profit they can squeeze out as their only lobbyists on such issues.
  There's already a group that is lobbying for us effectively on those issues - the EFA!
15. Re:Yarr by GaryPatterson · 2009-09-29 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  I wouldn't sign anything until I see their consitution.
  If they advocate a real, workable solution that provides benefit to content creators while strengthening the rights of content consumers, then I'm interested.
  If it's just "we should get stuff for free" then I hope they're consigned to the political oblivion they would so richly deserve.
  So far, I'm feeling it's going to be closer to the latter than the former. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised though.
16. Re:Yarr by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 15:17 · Score: 0
  
  If you're Australian and involved in IT so should you.
  Bullshit. This is the kind of low brow thinking that our politicians play into and is using the same motivational techniques used by One Nation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Hanson, albeit with a different slant.
  All aussies, at the end of the day, don't give a rats arse (that's a colloquialism for you foreign readers meaning "we don't care") about politics and largely ignore it, despite the fact we are forced to vote.
Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by bostei2008 · 2009-09-28 21:31 · Score: 5, Interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Pirate_Party
This may not sound much, but it is actually pretty good for a new and totally unknown party with a scary name. Hopefully the aims of the party (internet Censorship, civil rights etc) will now get some public attention.
1. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Arancaytar · 2009-09-28 22:01 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Exactly - the PP pulled past the rightwing extremists with flying colors and taken on the title of the "biggest of the small parties". The news agencies moved them out of "Others" into their own column. To compare, the Greens got 1.5% when they first ran, and "save the Earth" sounds easier to convince people of than "copyright needs to be revised". This was a grand success! :D
2. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 22:48 · Score: 1
  
  This may not sound much, but it is actually pretty good for a new and totally unknown party with a scary name.
  1. Re-Brand using a backronym in order to appeal to a more general audience.
  2. Expand the party platform somewhat to be less of a single-issue party.
  3. Wait four years.
  4. Seats in the parliament!
  Note the absence of question marks.
3. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by bluesatin · 2009-09-28 22:58 · Score: 1
  
  You mean there won't be any profit?
4. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 23:32 · Score: 0
  
  1. Re-Brand using a backronym in order to appeal to a more general audience.
  While I agree with your other points, the first one doesn't work. Making "PIRATEN" a backronym would only serve to liken it to the party PARTEI, the latter being a group that ridicules our much-show-little-contents politics through satire.
5. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by icebraining · 2009-09-28 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  Expand the party platform somewhat to be less of a single-issue party.
  If they do that, they risk loosing support. One of the major reasons for this growth is that they defend a cause (against censorship and freedom of speech) which is supported by people from left and right-wings. It doesn't matter if you are more or less liberal in economic terms, if you defend Democracy, you defend freedom of speech.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
6. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  You mean there won't be any profit?
  There already _is_ profit. Somewhat above €500k in campaign cost reimbursements for getting more than 0.5% of the votes. Getting seats in the parliament is the next step.
7. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 23:35 · Score: 1
  
  If they do that, they risk loosing support.
  It worked for the Greens. They started out worse 30 years ago, and now they're regulars in parliament. A party that stays single-issue isn't going to _gain_ much support.
  One of the major reasons for this growth is that they defend a cause (against censorship and freedom of speech) which is supported by people from left and right-wings.
  And that precludes forming an opinion on other topics?
8. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 23:40 · Score: 1
  
  While I agree with your other points, the first one doesn't work. Making "PIRATEN" a backronym
  Make it into a three- or four-letter backronym that's still recognizable. Heck, isn't that what texting is all about? ;)
  PRTN, "Partei fuer Rechte der Buerger, Technologie und Neue Medien". I'm sure that with a bit of brainstorming, they can come up with something that makes more sense. Creativity isn't one of their weak points.
9. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 23:45 · Score: 0
  
  I would have no problem if they produced a manifesto using a backronym like that as a tongue-in-cheek, but the idea of renaming the entire party doesn't make sense to me.
10. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 00:44 · Score: 0
  
  There are three other parties in Germany that share those aims you listed (free democrats, green party and left party). I am glad that the PP did so well but It's not as if the PP invented those topics over here.
11. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by maxwell+demon · 2009-09-29 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  Re-Brand using a backronym in order to appeal to a more general audience.
  Partei gegen Idiotische Regelungen und Anderen Total Entsetzlichen Nonsens? :-)
  (Party against idiotic rules and other totally terrible nonsense)
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
12. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-29 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  Partei gegen Idiotische Regelungen und Anderen Total Entsetzlichen Nonsens? :-)
  Ok, you owe me a new monitor. And a new keyboard. Mine didn't survive being showered with coffee. ;)
13. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2009-09-29 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  Given the number of people who like free stuff and who haven't properly grasped the effects of copyright law, I would have thought that number would be much higher.
  
  --
  You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
14. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by V+for+Vendetta · 2009-09-29 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  There are three other parties in Germany that share those aims you listed (free democrats, green party and left party).
  And all but the left party (which didn't existed in that incarnation then) had pretty much forgotten about this. Remember wire taping (1996, FDP), "Otto Katalog I + II" (2001+2002, Grüne), just to name two examples? Of course, it might be coincidence that both of them discovered their civil rights roots about the same time the PIRATEN were formed. But, honestly, I doubt it.
15. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by bostei2008 · 2009-09-29 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  I disagree,
  the people I know who voted for the Pirate Party voted for other reasons.
  Internet censorship, surveillance, freedom of speech - the fact that the current german government does not care a rats ass for any civil rights. This brought far more people onto the streets than pirating music; reducing them to that does them injustice. .. oh, I got it. You were just trolling, were you?
16. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by bostei2008 · 2009-09-29 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  You also can read this another way.
  The proclaimed issues of the PP were important enough for two percent of the population to actually vote for a small party, well knowing that PP probably does not make it into the government and their votes would be lost, somewhat.
  But the actual percentage of population being p**d off at the german government for these reasons is probably far higher, otherwise FDP and green party both would not have gained so much votes.
17. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 06:46 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Can a German explain to me why the pirate party is even needed in Germany? There already is the FDP which has a strong civil rights wing and is, for example, opposed to goverment monotoring of private internet use by the secret service. Since the FDP already gets 15% of the vote, surely it would make more sense to just join that party and make sure they follow through on their civil rights agenda. As it is you split the votes between two parties, and especially with the 5% threshold, votes get wasted and nothing useful happens.
18. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by smoker2 · 2009-09-29 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Are you a troll ? it's not about free stuff. It's about getting what's owed to us. By law, by agreement, copyright was supposed to be a contract, and it has been turned into a cash cow for rich bastards. We had the other side of that contract, and the government, who were responsible for protecting our side of the contract, have caved in and given away our heritage. We want it back !
19. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Ihlosi · 2009-09-29 07:56 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  There already is the FDP which has a strong civil rights wing and is, for example, opposed to goverment monotoring of private internet use by the secret service.
  If the FDP has to chose between tax cuts for a few and civil rights for everyone, they'll chose the former. And they usually have to chose, since they can't govern alone. Also, not everyone buys into their libertarian agenda.
20. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2009-09-30 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  I disagree,
  the people I know who voted for the Pirate Party voted for other reasons.
  Wait, you don't think that a hoard of shameless pirates would boost votes?
  No, don't worry, I get it. You weren't responding to my post, just to a strawman that you assumed represented my viewpoint.
  For the record, I know there are people out there who voted for the pirate party based on civil rights issues. But, exactly how many of that 2.0% do you reckon are voting primarily for civil rights, and not for legalised sharing? How many people include legalised sharing as a civil right that "must" be instated? How many built their opinions and values around feeding their addiction to free entertainment?
  
  This brought far more people onto the streets than pirating music; reducing them to that does them injustice.
  Then why the fuck would they join a party called "the pirate party"? By joining such a party who loudly touts poorly thought out and patronising copyright reform (in their title no less!), they place themselves in the company of pirates.
  
  --
  You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
21. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by SlothDead · 2009-09-30 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  Why not "Partei fuer basisdemokratische Initiative, Rechtsstaat, Arbeit, Tierschutz, Elitenfoerderung und Nochwas"? ;) (Non-Germans won't get that and should look up "Die Partei")
22. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-30 18:33 · Score: 0
  
  Okay, you are no strawman. I see you point but I do not share it, here is why:
  
  But, exactly how many of that 2.0% do you reckon are voting primarily for civil rights, and not for legalised sharing?
  This is just my personal view, maybe idealistic. I work as a programmer in the IT industry. Around me a lot of people are sympathizing with the PP exactly because of civil rights issues.
  None of them sympathizes with them because of pirating MP3s.
  In fact, most of them being programmers, they generally have a problem with pirating software.
  
  How many built their opinions and values around feeding their addiction to free entertainment?
  I also know people pirating shamelessly, aka stealing software and music. Those just do not strike me as PP voters.
  Yes, they will steal software and MP3s. But actually voting because of it? I mean, come on. Would you?
  Come election day, they probably find a lot of things more pressing than their MP3 collection. Economics, unemployment, too few/too many immigrants, whatever.
  This leaves the hardcore of people actually voting for PP because of deep conviction. As I said, to vote for a splinter party you must really convinced of your points, because it is too easy to think that your vote is somehow "wasted".
  But then, maybe I am idealistic.
  
  Then why the fuck would they join a party called "the pirate party"? By joining such a party who loudly touts poorly thought out and patronising copyright reform (in their title no less!), they place themselves in the company of pirates.
  I think the name is kind of cool. It carries. For me at least it carries a lot of meaning beyond "free MP3s".
  For me - for instance - it is the only party which stands in the face of internet censorship backed by a general child-porn-hystery.
  Their stance toward copyrights is actually the only thing I have problems with. And I agree with you, that still needs work.
23. Re:Piratenpartei got 2.0% in german elections by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2009-10-01 03:23 · Score: 1
  
  This is just my personal view, maybe idealistic. I work as a programmer in the IT industry. Around me a lot of people are sympathizing with the PP exactly because of civil rights issues.
  I certainly believe you. I've seen enough of slashdot here to realise that the majority of people here rallying behind the pirate party are doing so out of apparent concern for the state of civil liberties.
  However, I do think that people would vote for the pirate party to legalise sharing (even if I would not). Hell, there are plenty of parties who's primary line is legalising certain drugs, and whose stance on the economy, foreign relations, or anything remotely important, is more a wire-mesh model of policy, rather than policy itself. Granted, only a handful of people vote for them.
  Still, it could well be a deciding factor for many people. When tossing up between two groups that both kinda represent their interests, they might decide the one that promises free entertainment. These things have influences, and I find that appeal to the greed in people distasteful in general. Especially when they are promising things that they really can't deliver, telling (a certain subsection of) the public what they want to hear, and making up a bunch of BS to back it up. (Pardon the obvious rant.)
  It kinda makes me wish that the pirate party would tone down the copyright reform line, and make it more moderate. Then I would get behind them. God knows copyright needs some tightening up.
  
  I think the name is kind of cool. It carries. For me at least it carries a lot of meaning beyond "free MP3s".
  Perhaps so, but it still carries it! The combination of their copyright policies, and having it take prime position in their title, again I find it distasteful.
  
  --
  You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Not 2 percent in Germany by Denial93 · 2009-09-28 21:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

2 percent in Germany might not be correct. Pirate party votes have been lost in at least one voting district and it only came out because the result said no votes were cast for them, while at least three voters report voting for them. The official preliminary results for Berlin do not show pirate party votes either, although this is probably just a glitch as 3,5% were reported for Berlin before.

Investigations are ongoing.

--
blow your mind already
1. Re:Not 2 percent in Germany by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 22:06 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah...3 votes were lost. I'm sure that will give them a few additional %...
2. Re:Not 2 percent in Germany by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 22:15 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  There are two tables for the results of Berlin. The first one shows the results for the 'Erststimme' (first vote) which is used to elect a direct candidate for your district. Since there were no direct candidates from the pirate party for Berlin, the number of votes is 0. The second table shows the results for the 'Zweitstimme' (second vote), which is used to assign the seats in the 'Bundestag' proportionally to all parties that gained more than 5%. As you can see, the votes for the pirate party do appear in this table.
  I hope this helps. But mind you, the German election system is extremely complicated.
  Greetings from the Germany.
What we actually manages to do by redhog · 2009-09-28 21:39 · Score: 2, Interesting

This is only the beginning. PP has shown that change is possible, that it is possible to reach positions where you can affect actual policies:
The swedish Pirate Party has one member in the European Parliament since this summers' election. This MEP is now one of the 14 MEPs in the group working with the european commission to work out a final solution for the Telecom package.

--
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
Keen As by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:40 · Score: 0

I signed up.
Very excited that this is happening!
Could there be a more supid name by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:40 · Score: 3, Funny

For a political party?

"What's the name of your organization?"
"The Pirate Party."
"Oh, aren't those the ones that believe in pirating other people's hard work?"
"No uhh... the name is a uhh... shut up, Arrr!!!!"
1. Re:Could there be a more supid name by maxwell+demon · 2009-09-29 02:33 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  "No, the name is a reference to fighting global warming!"
  
  --
  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
2. Re:Could there be a more supid name by Idbar · 2009-09-29 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  What about Buccaneers? That should do it!
  By the way, there's no "Ahoy" tag?
At last... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 21:51 · Score: 0

a political party actually worth joining.
That Conroy luddite will cop an earful.
Yes, they are expending fast by saibot834 · 2009-09-28 22:12 · Score: 3, Informative

German Pirate Party gets some attention, though it could be more. They have been successful this far, because they address topics that major parties ignore (internet cencorship, civil rights, privacy, government transparency, open access, copyright, patents, ...). They got 0.9% at European Parliament election in June and now they got 2% in federal elections. Their membership number is exploding (currently almost 10,000, graph).
Even though some pirates hoped for a better result, 2% is absolutely astonishing. If their success continues (and polls show that PP has 13% of all first-time voters, some time is working for us), they may very well be in the Bundestag (parliament) in four years. By comparison, Green party had 1.5% in its first federal election in 1980 and since the following election, they are represented in the Bundestag with constantly over 5%.
1. Re:Yes, they are expending fast by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 22:29 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  13% of all first-time voters, some time is working for us
  I heard that it was 13% of the male first time voters.
Pirate Party is too narrow a term by Ritontor · 2009-09-28 22:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think the Pirate Party should rebrand itself as the Internet Party, Digital Party or Future Party, some such thing, and just fight for the rights of all things that service the good of the Internet, which is kinda what they're doing anyway, except to the layman, who asks "what the hell has pirates got to do with the Internet"?

--
Perhaps the answer to the problem of teenagers dropping bricks from motorway and railway bridges is to sue Tetris.
1. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 22:41 · Score: 1
  
  I think the Pirate Party should rebrand itself as the Internet Party, Digital Party or Future Party, some such thing,
  Duh, if they rebrand themselves, they should use a backronym, of course. Conveniently enough, Pirate starts with a P, as does Party. Just knock a few letters from "Pirate(s)" to end up with a three- to four-letter backronym palatable to the general public.
2. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by martinX · 2009-09-28 22:51 · Score: 1
  
  IRA Party?
  
  --
  When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
3. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by deniable · 2009-09-28 23:01 · Score: 1
  
  How about Digital Rights Management? DRM is good, no DRM is bad, no the other DRM.
4. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 00:02 · Score: 0
  
  I think the Pirate Party should rebrand itself as the Internet Party, Digital Party or Future Party
  I believe that would be a big mistake. "Pirate Party" may sound ridiculous at first, but "Green Party" did just the same. In contrast, renaming it would only make it lose its edge.
  
  and just fight for the rights of all things that service the good of the Internet, which is kinda what they're doing anyway, except to the layman, who asks "what the hell has pirates got to do with the Internet"?
  All the more reason to stick to the name "Pirate Party". It has a much stronger presence than "Digital Party", "Future Party" or "Internet Party" - and it can easily be associated with all of those values by informing the voters.
5. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by Xest · 2009-09-29 00:43 · Score: 1
  
  The Pirate Party name gets average joes asking what they actually stand for.
  Calling it something mundane just leaves them thinking "Oh, just another run of the mill minority party".
6. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by MrKaos · 2009-09-29 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  I think the Pirate Party should rebrand itself
  
  what about the Irate Party?
  
  --
  My ism, it's full of beliefs.
7. Re:Pirate Party is too narrow a term by CrystalFalcon · 2009-09-30 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  If we had called ourselves any of those names, this story wouldn't have been here.
Great... by AlastairLynn · 2009-09-28 22:30 · Score: 0, Troll

I want a British pirate party now. We need one :/
1. Re:Great... by PeterBrett · 2009-09-28 22:37 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I want a British pirate party now. We need one :/
  That's okay, because we've got one! Just passed 500 paid-up members, too.
  
  --
  Pirate Party UK
2. Re:Great... by AlastairLynn · 2009-09-28 22:45 · Score: 1
  
  My mind, it is blown.
2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by Ihlosi · 2009-09-28 22:43 · Score: 1

In their first federal election in 1980, the Green party got 1.5% in Germany. And they received much, much more media attention.
1. Re:2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by eoinmadden · 2009-09-28 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  They were on 10% in Sunday's election, I think.
2. Re:2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by dkleinsc · 2009-09-28 23:33 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps the media companies who stand to lose quite a bit if the Pirate Party gains real traction are not exactly keen on giving it a lot of attention?
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
3. Re:2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by ArsenneLupin · 2009-09-29 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  The point is, the pirate party got more votes than the Green party back then, despite lack of media attention. How much traction do you think they'll get at the next election, when the media will have to talk about them?
4. Re:2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry, try again.
  There was coverage about the PP in the larger german newspapers and magazines (Zeit, Sueddeutsche, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, taz, Spiegel, ...). Don't know about TV though, don't watch it that much.
5. Re:2% may not sound like much, but consider this: by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 03:23 · Score: 0
  
  They were mentioned in the discussions on TV, at least in those that involved questions from the public. Usually it was the liberals and greens that wanted to convince people to vote for them instead (with some good reason, but only if you believe them to at least marginally do what they promise instead of judging them by their past behaviour, which I don't).
Mod parent up by saibot834 · 2009-09-28 22:55 · Score: 1

I heard that it was 13% of the male first time voters.
Sorry for the misinformation, you are right. Here's the source: telepolis (German)
good luck by Tom · 2009-09-28 23:03 · Score: 1

All the best to our australian friends. For those who didn't follow the news: The Pirate Party has reached a newsworthy 2.1% here in Germany in our general election last sunday.
It's great to see that we're becoming an international movement, and the support we're gathering is considerable.

--
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
ayÄ±ÅYÄ±gÄ± by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-28 23:28 · Score: 0

http://www.ay-isigi.net/ thank you admin.
im not sure a pirate party by nimbius · 2009-09-28 23:29 · Score: 2, Funny

would gain any ground in the states, and for two reasons.

1. the average american has been boiled like a frog into accepting the illegality of downloading content that majority shareholders and major corporations deem "unsuitable." id hate to even think it, but it almost seems as though we just dont care about or rights and freedoms as long as we're marketed a product that appears to cater to our wants reglardless of our rights (ipod and zune for example)

2. most americans and lawmakers especially would have a terrible time not associating the pirate party with somali pirates, if not at least subconsciously. This would need to be retooled to have a prettier name at very least.

finally for extra credit, americans have trouble with things like sex and sexuality, so if there were an initiative as pervasive as AU to censor our tubes, its hard to think there would be much if any resistance to it simply based on our culture. Just my theory.

--
Good people go to bed earlier.
1. Re:im not sure a pirate party by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-29 00:27 · Score: 0
  
  2. most americans and lawmakers especially would have a terrible time not associating the pirate party with somali pirates, if not at least subconsciously. This would need to be retooled to have a prettier name at very least.
  I see the problem here, since my sister also thinks that a download manager is some kind of boss at the docks.
  Probably something like "Privateering Party" would appeal more to the American voters? Or something fluffier, like "Corsairs'R'Us"?
  
  americans have trouble with things like sex and sexuality
  I.... can't....Too many jokes.....
2. Re:im not sure a pirate party by ZOmegaZ · 2009-09-29 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I'm running for US Congress with their endorsement, so we'll just see about that next November. :-)
  
  --
  Former US House candidate, TN-5
3. Re:im not sure a pirate party by nomadic · 2009-09-29 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  but it almost seems as though we just dont care about or rights and freedoms as long as we're marketed a product that appears to cater to our wants reglardless of our rights
  
  Out of curiousity, what freedom are you demanding here? To download something that is copyrighted?
4. Re:im not sure a pirate party by kalirion · 2009-09-29 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  I, for one, look forward to watching the Peter Griffin Side Boob Hour.
5. Re:im not sure a pirate party by smoker2 · 2009-09-29 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  fuck off troll.
6. Re:im not sure a pirate party by nomadic · 2009-09-29 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  You don't have an answer, in other words.
7. Re:im not sure a pirate party by GaryPatterson · 2009-09-29 14:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's a valid question, and one that will be asked by every voter. Surely you have an answer?
They may just get a seat. by shitdrummer · 2009-09-28 23:48 · Score: 2, Informative

They may just get a seat.

One of our current federal senators is Seven Fielding, of the christian political party called Family First. http://www.stevefielding.com.au/

That fool got his seat with only 1.8% of the primary vote. The remainder were on preferences.
1. Re:They may just get a seat. by LordLucless · 2009-10-01 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  Except none of the other political parties are going to give their preferences to the Pirate Party. That's how they keep out any radical changes they don't like. Only good little parties that toe the line get preferences.
  
  --
  Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
The GPL by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 01:46 · Score: 1

How quickly people forget that the GPL relies on copyright to function.
1. Re:The GPL by PeterBrett · 2009-09-29 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  How quickly people forget that the GPL relies on copyright to function.
  No, it's not forgotten at all. Stallman raised this issue a few weeks ago, and since then the Pirate Party UK, at least, has decided to adopt the solution he proposed:
  
  ...a special rule for free software: to make copyright last longer for free software, so that it can continue to be copylefted. This explicit exception for free software would counterbalance the effective exception for proprietary software. Even ten years ought to be enough, I think.
  (Okay, not exactly, because the exception would be for software released with source code, rather than for Free software explicitly).
  
  --
  Pirate Party UK
2. Re:The GPL by walshy007 · 2009-09-29 02:20 · Score: 1
  
  Even the gpl wouldn't be harmed much by reduction of duration of copyright. Taken from 100 years down to 15... hell the very first beta of the linux kernel would just be public domain as of a couple years ago.
  The problem with copyright as it is now is not that it exists... it's that the sheer duration has raped the public domain for a hundred years nearly. No new works can be derived from the inspiration of others that have been long since forgotten.. or copyright suits could emerge.
3. Re:The GPL by Vanders · 2009-09-29 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  Not at all. I even argued on the PPUK forums that we Open Source Software developers could not reasonably have our cake and eat it, an I stand by that as an Open Source developer. The PPUK have chosen to take a different policy (An exception for Open Source software) which is also fine, and defensible.
  
  --
  Syllable : It's an Operating System
4. Re:The GPL by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  An exception for your friends. Guess they are getting the hang of politics after all.
5. Re:The GPL by smoker2 · 2009-09-29 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  no it doesn't. are you completely stupid ? Copyright is set up to prevent you copying something. the fsf WANT you to be able to copy. So how is abolition of copyright going to prevent you from copying something ? You forget (as do most copyright apologists) that copyright expiration does not deny the erstwhile copyright holder from publishing their own work as well as the general public being able to.
  
  Any more excuses ? It would simply be more like the BSD licence, which IMHO is better anyway. Free is free isn't it ? there is plenty of free stuff within *BSD last time I looked.
6. Re:The GPL by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  The abolition of copyright will make it impossible for the sharing portions of the GPL to be enforced.
7. Re:The GPL by GoochOwnsYou · 2009-09-29 14:31 · Score: 1
  
  Simple: State in law a difference between Copyright and Copyleft. GPL would be classified as a Copyleft license and wont be affected.
  
  --
  This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
8. Re:The GPL by DAldredge · 2009-09-29 15:53 · Score: 1
  
  Copyleft depends on copyright law.
9. Re:The GPL by GoochOwnsYou · 2009-09-29 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Not if you establish a copyleft law separate from copyright law.
  
  Good pieces of legislation do not depend on other pieces of law as it is always possible for those other laws to be changed.
  
  Its reasonable to depend only on Constitutional law as you require referendums to change those which are usually rare.
  
  --
  This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
Mr 2% by TapeCutter · 2009-09-29 01:49 · Score: 1

Seven Fielding AKA "Mr two percent" can under certain circumstances hold the balance of power and is the reason the government is having yet another "Yes Minister" inquiry into net censorship. This is why Aussies don't take the "threat" of a mandatory filter seriously, we all know it will never fly. Both sides play this game, it's just political theater to keep independent nuts busy chasing their tails. I believe Fielding has gone off the idea a bit now that his own anti-abortion supporters have appeared on the convienently leaked test blacklist.

Personally I don't want the PP or anyone else with a measley 2% winning a seat via a preference quirk but as you demonstrated, it happens.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
They shoudln't have advertised for a President by fast+turtle · 2009-09-29 02:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

That's not the Pirate Way. What they needed was a Captain, A second Officer, Master at Arms, Helmsman, Navigator and you certainly can't forget cook. That's what it takes to run each and every pirate ship we have, not some new fangled rank like President.

--
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Johnny Depp available by fhuglegads · 2009-09-29 02:55 · Score: 0

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni1029429/ Due to Disney firing Dick Cook (insert childish joke here), Depp has left the "Pirates" franchise. The Pirate Party should recruit him.
Rickard Falkvinge = Idiot by dthx1138 · 2009-09-29 04:00 · Score: 1

I knew this party was a joke the minute I heard Rickard Falkvinge being interviewed on NPR. When asked if he believed that there should be at least some kind of system set up where artists are still compensated for their works, he said (and I'm paraphrasing) "With all these media outlets like the internet in the world, artists can no longer expect to get paid for their creativity." Hah.

--
I just found the box to change my sig. Um.... [timeless witticism].
What, no ninja party? by sean.peters · 2009-09-29 05:27 · Score: 1

Cue the global warming jokes in 3... 2... 1...
In the Netherlands we have a future party... by KlaasVaak · 2009-09-29 09:24 · Score: 1

... They want to replace the ministry of defence with the ministry of feast and use to money currently allocated to new defence systems to provide the people with free beer. You really want to be associated with that?

--
Dyslexics are teople poo
Im thinking about it... by GoochOwnsYou · 2009-09-29 14:19 · Score: 1

Though if I sign up I will want to make it worthwhile. Meaning I will want to enter the 2010 elections.

Vote GoochOwnsYou, Senate 2010?

--
This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
how long until they are deemed "terrorists"? by vaporland · 2009-09-29 15:22 · Score: 1

The USA will declare them a terrorist organization, conduct electronic surveillance on their members and prosecute everyone contributing money towards their cause...

--
Ask Me About... The 80's!
The disease is spreading over the world ... by Misagon · 2009-09-30 01:44 · Score: 1

Their primary issue is to make software piracy legal, but they are also engaged in *real* political issues: issues on patent law, personal information, freedom from unnecessary wire-tapping etc.
Because these secondary issues are being persued by the Pirate Party, I am afraid that the party is inadvertedly casting them in a light of illegitimacy. By making legitimate issues their own, they are making it harder for politicians from other parties to make the same issues their own.
Instead of working for a more free, just society, I think that the Pirate Party is in effect doing the opposite: pushing some of the most important political issues away from the agenda of those who could have made a difference.

--
"We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley