Swedish Pirate Party Fails To Enter Parliament
pickens writes "TorrentFreak reports that with 95 percent of the votes counted, it is clear that the Pirate Party will not enter the Swedish Parliament. The Party is currently stuck at about 1 percent of the total vote, nowhere near the 4 percent threshold it needs. This means that neither WikiLeaks nor The Pirate Bay will be hosted under Parliamentary immunity and the Party won't get the chance to legalize non-commercial file-sharing or criminalize 'copyright abuse' as they planned. 'The Swedish Pirate Party did its best election campaign ever. We had more media, more articles, more debates, more handed-out flyers than ever. Unfortunately, the wind was not in our sails this time, as it was with the European elections,' says party leader Rick Falkvinge. The party will now have to wait four more years before they have another shot at entering the Swedish Parliament. 'Each generation must reconquer democracy,' adds Falkvinge. 'Nobody said it was going to be an easy fight.'"
How is democracy related to stealing revenue from other people?
If this was successful... whats next, the auto theft movement for "Rightfully freeing car from their owner for anyone to use."?
I'm going to need to to repeal some environmental laws on my property then. Ever since they passed a law prohibiting me from mining there, I've been unable to extract revenue from that resource.
In case you missed my snark, how can you steal revenue from an object that you yourself own? Once a work is released, it becomes public property. The only thing these people 'own' is the granted right to control the reproduction of that public property. That right is granted by the government. I fail to see how the government ceasing to grant that right would be theft.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Piraty Party itself ignored whole area of jobs, healthcare and so on. The actual important things that government should take care of, and what majority of people care about. For most people they are more important than the ability to get entertainment for free. That's how democracy works.
Is it "swastica-waving", though, or are they "just" racist?
Then they need to drop the childish name. "The Pirate Party" makes it sound like they are a bunch of rebellious kids flaunting how they like to break the law and get away with it.
If they want positive economic and legal reform, then they should adopt a name that is expressive of such reform, in a mature and positive light.
Maybe some thing like "the digital party" or "the free information party" or maybe pull a trick out of the other side's hat and choose something like "the information protection party" or "cultural preservation party."
I hope four years is enough time for them to grow up.
Society is still not ready for this progressive thinking mentality.
The people currently working in the government grew in a time when media (or intelectual property as some want to call it) was a scare resource, thus they do not understand the current situation.
We need to wait some time, maybe one generation, when politicians, leaders, and in general other decision makers (e.g. grown people with some power) are individuals who grown understanding the nature of media; how it can be shared in a costless manner, and the advantage that such thing provides. We are still not ready, but we are getting there.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Most voters are not people who would vote for someone just because of one narrow point.
You must be young?
If majority A wants to screw minority B, then democracy has got you covered! Well, to within a constitution, but constitutions have never covered all possible methods of screwing.
However, democracy doesn't protect against stupid decisions. Democracy is only as good as the people who use it.
(Mods, bring it on! I'm not even trolling, but it never stopped you before!)
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
It's dead in the water I'm afraid.
It may have been funny in the Swedish dorms, but it's holding you back and globally now.
Time to get serious. And this from a pirate. So have a burial at sea, make it walk the plank, whatever. But jettison the moniker.
- js.
Great. I'll take your bank account access information and post it online. By hiding that information you're obviously creating scarcity where none needs to exist. After all, you'll still have a copy of the information, so making an exact duplicate can't be wrong.
Oh, you say you'll lose money that way? Well, that's the same argument copyright holders make.
This is a particularly retarded analogy. My bank account information is not covered by copyright. It's not even especially secret. It's printed on every check I mail out. There's nothing wrong with copying that information as many times as you like. You only run into problems when you use that information for fraud.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
BitZtream is obviously a little retarded himself. At the moment some Swedish residents have trouble going around and beating up people that are gay/black/muslim/etc, it's not the kind of thing people turn a blind eye to. So those that wish to are obliged to vote for a suitable candidate that will help them. On the other hand the whole country is quite happily pirating digital material to their heart's content, so there is less impetus to vote Pirate. Personally I think the Pirate Party is an excellent idea, and their members quite well reasoned, however trying to get a single-issue party into any national parliament is incredibly difficult.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
'Socially acceptable' doesn't make something right. eg. Keeping slaves used to be socially acceptable (almost required if you wanted to get ahead in society).
No sig today...
But 'socially acceptable' doesn't automatically make it wrong, either. You dodged the question and tried to derail the conversation by making reference to an emotionally-charged issue, which has absolutely no relevance to the discussion.
So, it is OK to copy information as long as you don't use the information.
But, when you make a copy of information, you use the copy repeatedly.
And, it is not defrauding. It is correcting an artificial scarcity using YOUR assets. Just like you claim you are correcting an artificial scarcity using SOMEONE ELSE'S assets