Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pirate Party Pillages Private Papers

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the information-wants-to-be-free dept.

David Crafti writes "Pirate Party Australia has made the move to host the recently leaked ACTA document in order to highlight the lack of government transparency in the negotiation process. We believe that the document is not under copyright, and we are not party to any NDAs, so there should be no restriction on us posting it. We would like to see what the government (any government) tries to do about it. If it turns out that there is some reason that we have to take it down, then we will, but if this happens, it will only validate the document's authenticity."

21 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Well Played by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We would like to see what the government (any government) tries to do about it. If it turns out that there is some reason that we have to take it down, then we will, but if this happens, it will only validate the document's authenticity.

    We will post this to show what you guys are up to.
    If you try to get it taken down, it shows everything in the documentis true and real.

    That, my friends, is called a checkmate in my book.

    --
    I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    1. Re:Well Played by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We will post this to show what you guys are up to. If you try to get it taken down, it shows everything in the documentis true and real.

      That, my friends, is called a checkmate in my book.

      Well, your book is wrong. Suppose the Pirate Party posts a paper positing that parliament pokes preteens and are thus purportedly pedophiles? Trying to take down a document says nothing about its veracity.

    2. Re:Well Played by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>>purportedly pedophiles? Trying to take down a document says nothing about its veracity.

      No but it does demonstrate that Free Speech is no longer the law of the land.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    3. Re:Well Played by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Well, your book is wrong. Suppose the Pirate Party posts a paper positing that parliament pokes preteens and are thus purportedly pedophiles? Trying to take down a document says nothing about its veracity.

      But the process would: if a court order was obtained on the grounds that it was false, defamatory, etc, then the government has stated it's false. If however they claim it's an official secret, privileged information, etc, that confirms the substance.

      Australia does have courts and laws, the government can't just send the Gestapo around. They need to have some legal justification for their actions.

    4. Re:Well Played by c-reus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess one of the reasons for hosting the ACTA is to see how the government responds to it. If they demand it to be taken down on the basis of copyright infringement or breach of NDA terms, then it's quite clear there's something fishy going on (that hasn't been discovered yet). If the government claims that the document is libelous ("we never wanted those things that are written in the document and have our name next to it"), then they're in denial -- or perhaps the document is faked. This would become clear after the ACTA documents are publicized by those that take part of the negotiations (not a leak but a "proper" publication).

      If the government ignores the whole deal, then they either don't care or don't see anything wrong with it.

  2. Public Domain NOW! by headkase · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The one issue that would make me vote for the Pirate Party when they come to my nation is that they platform on restoring an actual PUBLIC DOMAIN. None of this pretend public domain, if it doesn't expire in my lifetime there is no public domain - there is only lip-service. A period of say 20 years or so: imagine if you could go to any bittorrent site and download any movie, music, book, or software from 1990 or before? And that's not even whats important, whats important is derivative works: say a new movie based on Alien with actual alien characters, plot devices, and characters! These new works would then be eligible for their own copyright and with a well so deep to draw from you can imagine the explosion of works that would result from having a public domain! But of course, we have now, the content industry is hoarding every work to themselves in perpetuity stealing works that could have been right out from under our noses.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Public Domain NOW! by headkase · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Interactive media, people can get their Blender Alien models in good shape and with the Free engines the newest "sanctioned" Aliens game would actually have to be really awesome to keep up with the competition. Competition is what content holders are scared of, they don't like the idea that a modern Terminator could be made - you know just in case they happened to maybe cash in on it a bit more in the next eighty (give some decades too) years of government monopoly they already have. Or they could do what they do right now which is ignore all these works while saying: "not yours, fuck off." Gaming wise would stand to see the biggest explosion and you can be sure as shit that is exactly what terrifies content oligarchies of today.

      --
      Shh.
    2. Re:Public Domain NOW! by headkase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you think that in 3000AD I should not be able to say "Aliens!" because whether its a millennium from now or eighty more years I'm still equally dead. Copyright isn't about corporate welfare forever into the future, it's about giving incentive to create. The deal is that in exchange for your limited monopoly after that period it becomes public domain. It has been distorted so far out of line that the public domain has no real meaning anymore - without doing a benefit analysis anywhere along the way other than "more copyright is good!" I think that more culture outweighs more copyright - that's how we make other people more like us. They made their profit with their limited monopoly now they want to renege on the other side of the deal? That's theft. Funny content industry is doing exactly what they accuse others of doing.

      --
      Shh.
    3. Re:Public Domain NOW! by headkase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Use it or lose it is an idea that deserves exploration. As long as token measures like "re-issuing a limited edition" and parlor tricks like that didn't count as "using" it I'm actually open to the idea. If you make Terminator 17 and all of them along the way have made enough profit that you'll be making a Terminator 18... It would still accomplish the goal of releasing the majority of works into a public domain where everyone would have a fair deal and shot at the tapestry of culture. What I'm looking at is an explosion in culture and "Use it or Lose it" could fit with that too.

      --
      Shh.
    4. Re:Public Domain NOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You have to sift through a lot of dross to find the real gems, but if all you have is a tiny handful to start with, there's not going to be very many jewels.

  3. Re:Berne convention will block this. by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You gave the answer yourself. All it takes is a government with the bollocks to do it. So we are all doomed...

  4. Re:Read into the record. by mea37 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not sure what the flaw in your reasoning is, but I can say with reasonable confidence that if it only took a single Congressperson to put any given piece of information in the public eye without repercussion, we'd live in a very different world than we do today.

  5. Re:I agree with their motives... by bbqsrc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It has been in discussion for two years, isn't two years long enough?

    --
    Disagree != mod troll.
  6. Re:I agree with their motives... by Diss+Champ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What sort of screwed up system would prevent discussion of something because it was amoung "issues currently up for debate"? Isn't the whole point of a debate to supposed to be to discuss something?

  7. Re:I agree with their motives... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    However, I wonder if parliamentary decorum doesn't traditionally restrict public discussion of issues currently up for debate...

    I think I speak for the people when I say fuck decorum if it conflicts with public debate. It is The People who will be suffering the effects of these bad to-be-laws for the foreseeable future if they should be passed, and therefore it is the people who must be able to debate the issues. That which flourishes in the dark and cannot withstand the light of public scrutiny has no place in the institutions of men.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Re:Berne convention will block this. by jvkjvk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are plenty of international treaties that are ignored, by one or multiple parties.

    There are plenty of cases where nothing is, or even can be realistically done about it.

    If the people of a country wish their government to withdraw from some treaty or other, I'm not sure that "There is nothing that can be done about it" is the proper answer.

    Do you live in sovereign state or not?

    Regards.

  9. It's sad.... by ma1wrbu5tr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that world governments can't seem to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, or end the diamond trade related genocides in Africa, but let big business whine about "potentially lost profits" and it's "World Leaders To The Rescue" Da.. Da.. DAAAA! Fucking disgusting. Let's hope ACTA turns out better for the little guy than the US's InuranceCompanyCareReformBill.

    --
    Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
  10. How about lying? by brit74 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "If it turns out that there is some reason that we have to take it down, then we will, but if this happens, it will only validate the document's authenticity."

    How about if the Pirate Party's version of the ACTA document is completely fabricated? I think lying would be a good reason to take it down, and it wouldn't imply that the document is authentic.

  11. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lighten up. Just because he plays the politics game doesn't mean he has to be a complete 'hole.

  12. Re:In other news... by TheMidget · · Score: 1, Insightful
    This is indeed (unfortunately) a serious concern. Although we geeks have a sense of humour about these things, many people out there have not.

    It's already the name... Many non-geeks go: "the Pirate Party? If that like the beer-drinker's party? Of the cyclist's-who-always-want-wind-in-their-back party"? And the in-jokes aren't improving the situation either...

    You can't win an election with just the geeks, so please maximize your chances by at least pretending to be serious. ... or else it will be the MAFIAA who'll have the last laugh...

  13. Re:In other news... by CorporateSuit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can't win an election with just the geeks

    You can if the votes are tallied by Diebold machines.

    --
    I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.