Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Filesharing Now an Official Religion In Sweden

Posted by timothy on from the but-do-they-have-snacks-and-coffee? dept.

bs0d3 writes "Kopimism is now an official religion in Sweden. Kopimi beliefs originated with the Swedish group called Piratbyran who believed that everything should be shared freely online without restrictions from copyright. Leader Isak Gerson, has recently had some disagreements with the Swedish Pirate Party where many people disagree with all religions." Here's the official website for the "Missionary Church of Kopimism."

13 of 358 comments (clear)

  1. It could be worse by obarthelemy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They could preach slavery, rape, murder, hating on gays/women/divorcees.
    Oh wait, that would probably let them justify having a state on top of a religion ^^

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    1. Re:It could be worse by JimCanuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes because slavery and lack of rights didn't exist under the "peaceful" way of life when the Dalai Lama was in charged of Tibet./sarcasm

    2. Re:It could be worse by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Only so in the western world. Buddhist countries, especially Theravada ones, lack that. That's why they're much more saner religions than western ones.

      And yet, it's illegal to even criticize the Monarchy in Thailand, Myanmar is a military dictatorship, and Cambodia had some of the worst atrocities this century.

      No religion (or country, or ethnic group) is above all of this crap ... granted, Buddhism doesn't have as much of a bent towards such things, but that doesn't mean that cultural attitudes don't get wrapped up in such thing.

      But, really, I've read stories about monks in Thailand (not to single them out) being involved in all sorts of things. I've even read stories of two sects openly fighting for control of temples because money was at stake.

      I wouldn't be so quick to believe that Buddhism (even Theravada) makes one immune to this kind of thing. Human nature means it is always there.

      It's easy enough to call yourself a practitioner of any religion and then proceed to all sorts of bad things in that name of that religion.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. so. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So he who toil and grule for months on end to make good to benefit many... Shalt not receive reward or compensation, for they create media and that shall be bread enough alone.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  3. Religious Prosecution of File Sharers by prakslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although they are only preaching "harmless" digital copying, followers of a religion can still be prosecuted for their actual practice if it is deemed criminal under the prevailing laws.

    "Freedom of Religion" rights enshrined in the constitutions of most countries rarely provide for exceptions to go against the prevailing laws. So, this new religion won't change anything. A better path is being followed by the Pirate Party who actually seeks to change the prevailing laws around information copying.

    1. Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Fun fact: In Finland, the only person you should confess a murder to is a priest. Even the court can't force a priest to break the secrecy."

      Better fact: The best kept secret is the one that no one else knows about.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    2. Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers by jpapon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, if the mother asks for it, and the doctor is the only one available to perform the procedure, then he should be forced to, or forced to retire. The doc signed up to be the caretaker of health for the community, and must perform his duties, or step down. You seem to think the doctor's rights as the health professional of a community supersede the rights of a woman towards her body. The doc can't push his ethics on others, he has no right to force a woman to keep her baby. He can do his job, or he can do what everyone else does, and quit. Simply saying "no" is not an option, and sets a dangerous precedent. What happens when the doc declines to give gays treatment for STDs? Or any other of the myriad of times when an MD is forced to treat someone whos religious views clash with their own?

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    3. Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think his point is that the SlashDot community tends to conflate "Christian" with "fundamentalist" and "evangelical," which, while a number of very vocal Christians are are not the entirety of the Christian community. The fact that this thread starts with the comment "They could preach slavery, rape, murder, hating on gays/women/divorcees. Oh wait, that would probably let them justify having a state on top of a religion ^^" and nobody has stood up to denounce that hatred itself is indicative of the issue. Topics about religion on SlashDot invariably involve these kinds of generalizations about "Christians" or religious types in general and nobody seems to have a problem with it.

      The truth is that religion itself has nothing to do with slavery, rape, murder, or hatred of certain groups. Dogmatic thinking (religious or otherwise), willful ignorance, sectarianism, and xenophobia do. The very act of denigrating "Christians" -- whether with direct attacks like this or with callous mocking like FSM and invisible unicorns -- and lumping them together in this fashion as rapists, murderers, slavers, etc. perpetuates the exact same behavior here that resulted in these atrocities.

      Religion isn't what's wrong. Religion is not evil. Hate is evil. Perpetuating misunderstanding and resentment is evil. Humans are evil, not organizations.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    4. Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers by gknoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An officer of the state, however, is acting as more than an individual, and should not be allowed to discriminate.

      So, your local priest or rabbi might decline to marry you and your (hypothetical) gay fiancee, but I dislike the idea of the local judge or magistrate declining to do so.

  4. Re:Is the clipboard by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    PD isn't exactly anti-copyright. Technically, you can take a Public Domain work, change it (even a little, add a space), and copyright it yourself. It is more of a "copyright irrelevant" non-license. You don't have to worry or think about copyright at all, if you choose. Literally, you, me, and everyone here can all claim copyright on virtually the same Public Domain work, legally.

    Of course, if you copyright it, you can't take away anyone's right to copy or use the Public Domain version all they want.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  5. Re:Is the clipboard by colinrichardday · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's already a Church of GNU Emacs. One of its tenets is that if you take the Church too seriously, seek professional help.

  6. Re:Joke by muuh-gnu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > only hurt copyright reform movements.

    How exactly? Your alleged "serious" copyright reform movements never achieved anything of significance. The Pirate Party has achieved siginificant visibility in Europe. They have seats in the European Parliament, in the Berlin parliament and will probably get seats in the German federal parliament next year. They have already forced major parties to seriously rethink their internet policies or risk losing the whole sub-30 generation.

  7. Re:Is the clipboard by GuldKalle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why didn't all religions have that?

    --
    What?