Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Party UK Looks Forward To 2012

Ajehals writes "The UK Pirate Party New Years message suggests a new sense of direction for the party, with a focus on policy and politics beyond what was seen as the party's norm, single issue position of copyright reform. Hoping to learn from and emulate the German Pirate Party's success in Berlin, Partly Leader Loz Kay is looking back over 2011 and to the future." I'm a slow learner; the Pirate Party for years struck me as mostly whimsical. If you live in a country with an active Pirate Party, what do you think of its impact? (According to Wikipedia, there are now PP organizations in at least 40 countries.)

79 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Things only get better for the Pirate Parties all over the world. Technology evolves a lot faster than the means to control information.

    Getting more laws to control society is wrong, but I guess the Americans and other SOPA adopters will find that out the hard way.

  2. Whats in a name? by Spottywot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was very impressed with the German Pirate Parties success last year, but if the UK PP wants to emulate it then it needs to be more vocal, and on a wider range of topics. If they don't they'll never get the attention of anyone who isn't already passionate about copyright abuses, or the attention of any part of the UK electorate that automatically dismiss the party because of the fact they have Pirate in thier name.

    --
    In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    1. Re:Whats in a name? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If they do that then they're no longer the Pirate Party, they're just another crap political party doing crap stuff and making crap deals to stay in power. They'll become what they despise.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Whats in a name? by nzac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No PP stands a chance under a FPP system, they would just split the Lib-Dem (or whatever the closest politically is) voters. Its bey

      Germany has a proportional system* that gives their PP a chance. Winning close to a majority of the population (of a region) for a seat is hard when less than half have any understanding of the issue.

        *i assume it was for that election

    3. Re:Whats in a name? by Spottywot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they do that then they're no longer the Pirate Party, they're just another crap political party doing crap stuff and making crap deals to stay in power. They'll become what they despise.

      Taking an interest in important issues other than copyright makes them crap and corrupt instantly? Wow.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    4. Re:Whats in a name? by Patch86 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately a British Pirate Party is unlikely to ever do as well as their counterparts in Germany. Not due to British political attitudes, but due to our electoral system. With our FPTP system, they will be unable to elect any MPs to parliament unless they can get several dozen thousand votes in a single constituency (average of about 70,000 voters per constituency). They need to be number 1 in a race already crammed with popular mainstream parties.

      More hope for MEPs (which are elected more proportionally), but then MEPs aren't exactly influential...

    5. Re:Whats in a name? by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      The German Pirates *are* trying to broaden their base by establishing their standpoint on other issues. They were amazed by how much of the vote they got in that Berlin election, amazed and unprepared.

      The way things work in Germany is that parties put up a list of candidates, and the voters do their thing. There are two different ways of handling this:

      • you get (say) 30 votes and can give candidates a maximum of three. A candidates' position on the list is determined by the number of votes they got as an individual. A voter can also just specify a party instead and then the top 10 candidates on the original list get the 3 votes each. Hell you can even mix things, give some to individuals and the rest to a party.
      • You vote for a party, the candidates' position on their list is then all-important.

      Whichever system is used, the top n candidates have then been elected. If an elected candidate dies, resigns, is convicted of a felony or whatever, the next candidate on the list is promoted in their place.

      With the Pirates in Berlin, I think every single candidate on their list made the cut. Some of them were just making up the numbers and were not particularly happy. That issue is taking up some of the party's energy.

      That should pretty much be a one-off thing. Candidates now know they run a risk of being voted in, increased public scrutiny led to one potential candidate in another area being identified as a member of a far-right organisation. I am expecting the other parties to start trying to defuse the anger by taking up the Pirates' issues themselves. That is what I'd like to see now. I have some lawyers for a porn producer after me claiming I was file-sharing one of their 'products'. The previous CDU+SPD coalition introduced a law where there is absolutely no burden of proof - if they say its so then it must be true, nice people like that would not lie.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    6. Re:Whats in a name? by coolmadsi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'd be all in favour of the Pirate Party to let their representatives vote as they please on issues that do not touch the main topics of the party. But here in Germany, the lack of a "proper programme" and the uncertainty of how the party would vote on other aspects than copyright issues has been one of the big stumbling blocks for the party (that democracy itself might be an issue does not even occur to the people here). The "Pirates" are seen as the ones who "don't have the answers". It's not that other parties would *have* "the answers" (as you see from Merkels course in the past year), but, regrettably, it is important to claim to have them!

      The Pirate Party in the UK is currently in the middle of a large policy consultation process where they have asked the wider UK population about issue that are important to them, in order to investigate an expanded base of policies (ones that are both suggested by people and voted on my members, as opposed to just made up to win favours)

      In the last elections they were also emphasising the lack of a Party Whip [1], which meant their representatives would be free to actually represent their constituents, and vote how they feel they should.

      [1] In UK politics, some parties have something called a Whip which enforces members of a party to vote a certain way (according to the "party line"), even if they otherwise wouldn't.

    7. Re:Whats in a name? by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      They have that in the US too, both parties have a whip in both the senate and the house. It's considered the #2 leadership position within the party for that body (#1 being the majority or minority leader, depending on who has more members).

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    8. Re:Whats in a name? by coolmadsi · · Score: 1

      With our FPTP system, they will be unable to elect any MPs to parliament unless they can get several dozen thousand votes in a single constituency (average of about 70,000 voters per constituency). They need to be number 1 in a race already crammed with popular mainstream parties.

      In my current constituency, the winner won with less than 35% of the vote, with under 15,000 votes, so it may be possible to make an impact in hotly contested areas. Maybe not straight away, but even taking votes away from the larger parties will start to get some notice.

    9. Re:Whats in a name? by Hentes · · Score: 1

      It will sure divide their voterbase. It would also ruin the internationality of Pirate Parties if they weren't just defenders of internet freedoms but started to mess with national politics.

    10. Re:Whats in a name? by muuh-gnu · · Score: 1

      If the pirate parties are insignificant nationally, they'll also be insignificant internationally. Their internationality wont get them any say in either national or international politics. They have to get stable power in their own nations to make a change.

      > It will sure divide their voterbase.

      To make a change, you have to get big. A united voterbase wont help them to get there if it is not big enough.

      > if they weren't just defenders of internet freedoms

      They are not internet freedom defenders per se, they are rather pushing transparency and direct democracy. The focus on internet freedoms only results from their members voting so. But they cant vote for internet fredoms all the time, over and over again, once they agreed on internet freedoms they have to discuss and agree on other topics. Give them enough time and they'll cover everything, simply because theres nothing else for them to do.

    11. Re:Whats in a name? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Not really. For example, in the last election I complained about the fact that the Pirate Party didn't, for example, propose that the BBC would be required to open its archives decades of taxpayer-funded shows for free download and require any future taxpayer-funded creative works to be released under a license at least allowing free redistribution within the UK. After the election, it turned out that this was one of their policies. But, even though I'm probably well in their target demographic, I had no idea.

      While I agree with a lot of what they say, they are absolutely terrible at communicating their policies with the electorate.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:Whats in a name? by nzac · · Score: 1

      In my current constituency, the winner won with less than 35% of the vote, with under 15,000 votes, so it may be possible to make an impact in hotly contested areas. Maybe not straight away, but even taking votes away from the larger parties will start to get some notice.

      Meanwhile they are taking votes from the party that is closest to their political views (i'm guessing its Lib-Dem*) hurting their (the PP's) cause.

    13. Re:Whats in a name? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Party in the UK is currently in the middle of a large policy consultation process where they have asked the wider UK population about issue that are important to them, in order to investigate an expanded base of policies (ones that are both suggested by people and voted on my members, as opposed to just made up to win favours)

      I'm afraid you have already failed. The moment you start spewing spin-doctored low grade management speak instead of just talking like a normal human being you are of no further interest to your core vote.

      The Greens know how to do it, but even then it has taken decades to get a single MP. They are doing okay in Europe and locally though. The problem with national elections is that people mainly vote based on who they want to form the government, which means one of the two main parties. Either that or they vote tactically to keep out the people they don't like, but either way if you are not Labour or Tory you have little chance at the national level.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Whats in a name? by Nimatek · · Score: 1

      Excuse me? Lack of a proper program? How about this: http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Parteiprogramm This is in fact the PP's official stance on many issues beyond internet and copyright. It has been worked out and voted on in the process of many party congresses.

    15. Re:Whats in a name? by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      the libdems are on the way out the condem collation will kill their traditional vote at the next election - the hard liberals IE traditional 18th century liberals and not American liberals) will get a safe seat or get bunged into the lords as a thank you.

    16. Re:Whats in a name? by I_Voter · · Score: 1

      DNS-and-BIND wrote: If they do that (support multiple issues) then they're no longer the Pirate Party,

      Actually that is a good tactic. Most nations, other than the U.S., allow private member-based political party organizations to have control of the politicians that want to run under the parties ballot label. This allows enforceable party platforms.

      Copyright issues may not be the primary issue for a large number of voters, although they may be friendly or a least neutral. These voters can be encouraged to vote for the Pirate party by including other issues in the Party platform, and promising to enforce this platform on the parties elected politicians.

      Background for U.S. citizens What is a Political Party?

    17. Re:Whats in a name? by gwolf · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Party's agenda is clear: Their main aim is to work against the IP nonsense. The name clearly says that's the main policy they are pushing to change. No, I would not say that just "taking interest" in other issues makes them crap and corrupt (as legislators, they'd have to take a stand on different issues and vote on all kinds of topics), but it would dillute their strong standing.
      I live in Mexico. Formally, there is a national Pirate Party organization - AFAICT, it's just a couple of enthusiasts, but they are not formally registered with the authorities or hold any political activities. I don't know how their campaign is carried out in European countries where they _do_ have representation, but I'd be very surprised if they had other points in their agenda. That means, "we will participate in the debates, and should hear and reflect our voters' opinions on other topics, but they are not central for us".
      I hope they keep it that way.

    18. Re:Whats in a name? by Ajehals · · Score: 1

      The issue that the party has is that it's small, has a limited number of activists and was scrambling somewhat in terms of political direction and understanding the process up until a few months ago. The way the party has been fixing that is by sorting the admin (new leadership team came in and fixed it..), getting some structure in place (candidate selection, policy process, even thins like web infrastrucutre and dev..) and building the people who can talk to the press to do so. The party didn't have a press office 6 months ago (it had a collection of people who would issue press releases ad hoc) it didn't have a central phone number, a development web server, amongst other things... There are massively more things that the party wants to do regionally, nationally and locally, but it will take us time with the members we have now, we could do more with more active members and supporters... One of the problems I see in the UK is that many people discussing politics, especially those sympathetic to the Pirate Party, are only interested in fully formed parties that can 'win' immediately, whereas realistically it takes time to build an organisation and have an impact (if you can even do it...).

    19. Re:Whats in a name? by Ajehals · · Score: 1

      The problem really is two edged. If the party doesn't approach other issues, the ones everyone feels is important, no-one would vote for the party. This is the largest criticism the party see's, 'how can we vote for you, even if we support your ideas on copyright, civil liberties etc.. if you don't have any policies on education/health/the economy'. So it's time to see if we can find policies that makes sense given the ideals and principles that inform our positions on copyright. Our candidates have theoretically had their own platforms in previous elections (with mixed success) but they haven't been well communicated or terribly well formed in all cases, broadening where there is consensus will help with this, more to the point, candidates can still do what they want to do in terms of policy, as long as they are clear to the party and the public, what they are standing on.

    20. Re:Whats in a name? by richie2000 · · Score: 1

      One other commonality is going for the reason that the copyright lobby can keep buying legislation - the corrupting influence of the lobbyist system and the way government keep stuff hidden. Ie following in Lessig's footprints.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    21. Re:Whats in a name? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      They should do it Ali G style. Go on debates with the other candidates and accuse them all of equine oral sex. The vast majority of accusations will be entirely accurate too - the only question is, how many of the candidates would flinch...

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  3. Re:Confused? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're totally right. They're still talking about freedom when they should be talking about terrorism.

  4. Re:Confused? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Did you just crawl out of a rock?. Terrorism is the new Freedom. It has been for ten years. What do you think bringing Freedom to Iraq and Afghanistan was all about?

  5. Re:Confused? by flaming+error · · Score: 2

    You can be forgiven for your false accusation, because understanding a two sentence summary could be a lot to ask of an AC. Especially one who fancies himself a psychoanalyst of overseas strangers whilst being undecided on his own mental state.

    FWIW, I'd say yes, you appear to be confused.

  6. If corruption is piracy by kawabago · · Score: 1

    The Conservatives in Canada might qualify. It's been all down hill for everyone but their friends since they took over.

    1. Re:If corruption is piracy by Pompz1 · · Score: 1

      There is an actual Canadian Pirate Party http://www.pirateparty.ca/ And personally, i think they could make a huge statement in Canadian politics, with enough support.

    2. Re:If corruption is piracy by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately it would just further split the left vote.

      We're well on our way to being a two party nation anyways. With the right consolidated it's really only a matter of time before the left decides something drastic needs to happen - especially considering the recent surprise-inversion of the Liberals and NDP.

  7. My question to the party is... by Lincolnshire+Poacher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Per their UK manifesto:

    Copyright should give artists the first chance to make money from their work, however that needs to be balanced with the rights of society as a whole.

    As someone not generally affected by copyright issues, can they explain to me what benefits there are to society of reforming copyright? Tangible, measurable benefits.

    Society should be about more than pop music and blockbuster films. Frankly the Pirate Party has to convince me that laws which deter people from sharing such things are actually bad. Perhaps they are actually a positive influence because they nudge people into doing something productive instead of passively consuming. Maybe someone decided to go outside and play football with their kids because they couldn't find a copy of a film to download; in that instance, society benefits.

    Do I care that Cliff Richard's recordings won't reach the public domain in my lifetime? Not at all. Society will continue with or without music.

    Do I care that public forests and parks are being sold-off? Absolutely, as that directly affects our society.

    1. Re:My question to the party is... by julesh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copyright reform isn't really about pirating copies of the latest blockbuster film. Frankly, that'll be pretty-much unaffected by any proposed changes to copyright. The real issues lie elsewhere, which is why "pirate party" is a *really* bad name for this group. I really think they ought to agree on a different name that puts the emphasis on the groups of people who *would* benefit from their proposals (mostly, "pirates" wouldn't).

      Principally, the benefits are:

      1. Consumer rights. Copyright is currently used as a means to enable the media companies to sell the same thing multiple times, because they want to keep getting revenue. But this comes at the expense of inconveniencing the people who legitimately have a right because they've bought it the first time. CDs that can't be ripped to people's preferred playback devices. Broadcast TV that has copy-protection flags that stop recorders working (which isn't advertised ahead of time, and most people just put down to faulty recorders when they fail to work, so people end up missing content they've paid for and have a right to see). Ebooks that can't be read by book-to-voice software because their DRM isn't licensed for it. Films that can't be played on hardware that is technically capable of it because one link in the chain doesn't have an approved encryption key. Lack of ability to view content on open platforms. Libraries that are unable to duplicate digital content for preservation. Legally-protected DRM is a huge pain to many users of content whose use *should* be legal.

      2. Artist's rights. It is becoming more and more common for artists to find themselves under legal threat for such issues as "unconscious copying", "stealing ideas" and similar. Yet copying has always been part of how we produce art, and these legal cases threaten to subvert that, holding up the development of new art.

    2. Re:My question to the party is... by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Because often times culture is a much better reflection of history than a textbook could ever be, and needs to be shared so we can not repeat the mistakes of the past by helping make a real connection to the past.

      Case in point, Bill Hicks'(RIP) rants on the Iraq war. As someone who was only in elementary school when the first Iraq war happened, I really only had a very elementary grasp on the situation(didn't help that i lived in an arch-Republican school district and we were essentially fed propaganda). Flash forward to late 2002 and the chicken hawks are on the march again, there attempts to silence the opposition was to shout "we support the troops" and basically insinuate that if you are against the war, you want all American soldiers to die. While I one it was insipid bullshit, what I didn't know was that this exact same song and dance had been done before in the build up to the first Gulf war. Then I went back and listened to some Bill Hicks stuff. Despite the fact that he died in 1994 his routines on the Iraq war basically could have applied just as equally(almost word for word really) to the 2003 war. And while we have things like Wikipedia that do a good job conveying the factual information, no academic explanation could really capture the past and how we are repeating it better than a lot of the media from the day.

      This is why a strongly enforced but short copyright is best for society. While I don't agree with the whole "free culture" movement in a lot of regards, as someone has got to pay for it at some point, the inability for young people now not to be able to put themselves in the shoes of someone from the past IS detrimental to society.

      Also, go watch some Bill Hicks on youtube, he has been dead for almost 17 years now, so I doubt he will miss the royalties.

    3. Re:My question to the party is... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Their copyright and patent stance is also something that is preventing myself from taking them seriously - the market for personal entertainment is absolutely huge, so allowing copying where there is no financial incentive will have a not insignificant impact on the economy. However honourable their position might be, I disagree with it.

      Their stance on drug patents is also a bit disconnected - sure, they say they will replace the pharmaceutical industries 15% of R&D investment with 20%, in exchange for removing patents altogether, but this isn't a fair replacement. For a start, the pharmaceutical industry is largely split into those firms who invest and gain the patents, and those firms that produce and supply generics with no investment - regardless of how much R&D funding you give the former, it doesn't stop the revenue being spread further among the industry from the first day of production. The firms doing the R&D will still lose out.

      Also, the BBC doesn't own most of its content - its licensed from the production companies, same as other networks. The BBC may commission productions, but they don't pay the full cost in quite a few circumstances. By requiring the BBC to shift those works to Creative Commons you are essentially going to force the BBC to pay more for them in the first place (as the production companies lose ancillary revenue from syndication etc) - who is going to fund that?

    4. Re:My question to the party is... by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      Go find a list of books and movies that didn't survive to the end of their respective copyright. Not only they won't reach the public domain in your lifetime, they won't reach public domain ever, period. Because there's no copy left to read or view and copy. There's your tangible, measurable benefit.

      And to address your claim that art doesn't matter, it does. Art shapes our view of the world. It makes us think about possibilities we wouldn't think about otherwise. Just try to notice how many concepts you think about and use when you speak every day come from books and movies. For example the vast majority of concepts regarding government spying indiscriminately and globally on its citizens comes from George Orwell's book 1984. We understand the dangers involved a little better because Orwell gave us a look at the consequences. What would the world look like today if the whole issue was completely new and unknown to everybody because the book was never written or because all copies were lost shortly after its release?

    5. Re:My question to the party is... by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      From a strictly economical point of view:
      Way to much time and energy is spent on restricting the usage of culture. It does not make sense to spend money on protecting works for over a hundred years if most of them don't bring in any revenue.

      Not being able to reuse once cultural heritage also raises the barrier for new artists to enter the market, especially in the world of electronic music. Most musicians don't have the resources to validate every sample.
      Furthermore, the artists that do enter the market will also have to pay for the protection of the old works, as those don't bring in any revenue themselves.
      Additionally, the only way of dealing with these restrictions is by joining a music label that takes care of it. Obviously they want a share of the revenue in return, lowering the overall profits of the budding artist.

      From a social/cultural point of view:
      Once basic economic needs have been met the human spirit longs for social contact. Culture is an important way of sharing thoughts, feelings, knowledge and experiences. Culture lasts only as long as it's being used. Once a book is no longer read or a song no longer sung it will be forgotten. If we are not allowed to keep the culture from our childhood alive, our children will never learn about it and it will be gone by the time our grandchildren get the right to use it.

    6. Re:My question to the party is... by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      The pharmaceutical claims that their 15% R&D gives them the right to all of the profits of a medicine and they use the law to sell it at a an inflated price. They even refuse to sell medicines to some countries because they can't afford these prices.

      The remaining 85% of the R&D is done by universities who are paid for by public money. It stands to reason that 85% of the profits should go back to the public/state. Furthermore, there is pressure on universities to get external funding. This typically involves getting a share of the 15% from the industry. In turn the industry gets to influence the research done at universities. This is why so many researchers are working on 'luxury' diseases instead of the disease that decimate the third-world, even in universities that should do fundamental research.

    7. Re:My question to the party is... by coolmadsi · · Score: 1

      Art matters, but not all art matters. The fact that my high school creative writing assignments are lost to the ages will not affect humanity in the slightest. Keeping things just for the sake of keeping them is a waste.

      While this may be true now, it might not be in the future. A large quantity of High School assignments might be immensely useful to a future historian or researcher.

      Half a century ago the BBC decided that their copies of early episodes of Doctor Who weren't worth keeping. They have since wished that they had kept them. Hindsight is like that.

    8. Re:My question to the party is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Less money is spent on things that doesn't need work better for everyone, don't you think ? Let's say, I give 10 euros for person workin in bar, I give in in part for products made with hard work and part in service and I feel it is ok. I give 10 euros for CD is not exactly the same no matter how professonaly it is made, not after million copies, you are paying more than it is worth and it is no good for society to pay more for things than their worth ? It is exactly same reason why banks that has right to capture 3-10% of all money that passes the banks, why ? It is not good for society to create system that gives money for no effort what so ever. That money that would not go for monopolistic behaviour would go somewhere else, maybe for people actually working ? If you write songs, right place to collect money is in concert, cd:s has has only promotional importance. I buy CD:s as souvenirs and I do not pirate, but I buy them from concerts to atleast trying to give money to one who did the work and here in Catalonia most artists gives their music for free in internet anyways so buying a CD is just bonus ( els amics de les arts or els catarres etc. ).

    9. Re:My question to the party is... by next_ghost · · Score: 1

      Not all art matters, but that's not an argument in this case. Copyrights affects most heavily especially the art that does matter. In essence, it gives the power to erase a copyrighted work from existence to a handful of people - the copyright owners. And the worst thing is that to exercise this power, due to the ridiculous length of copyright, the copyright owners literally don't have to move a finger. It takes more effort to save a work of art for future generations than it takes to destroy it before it enters public domain.

    10. Re:My question to the party is... by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Society should be about more than pop music and blockbuster films. Frankly the Pirate Party has to convince me that laws which deter people from sharing such things are actually bad. Perhaps they are actually a positive influence because they nudge people into doing something productive instead of passively consuming. Maybe someone decided to go outside and play football with their kids because they couldn't find a copy of a film to download; in that instance, society benefits.

      Do I care that Cliff Richard's recordings won't reach the public domain in my lifetime? Not at all. Society will continue with or without music.

      Well, music and the arts in general are part of human life. Living for the sake of living is pointless, for a human being. Moreover, pop music is not the only art that is affected by copyright - literature is, as well, as well as all other kind of music (including classical, Jazz, Rock, etc.), visual arts, films and so on. And moreover, copyrights affect the sciences as well. I can't tell you how many times I felt hatred towards the institution of copyrights, when I had to give up copyrights to my scientific work to a cocksucker scientific journal, that will then lock up the scientific work for the next several decades. Fuck that. That's not why I am doing research, to make some fat executive even more rich.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    11. Re:My question to the party is... by mounthood · · Score: 1

      The real issues lie elsewhere, which is why "pirate party" is a *really* bad name for this group. I really think they ought to agree on a different name that puts the emphasis on the groups of people who *would* benefit from their proposals (mostly, "pirates" wouldn't).

      Using the name "Pirate" is an attempt to reclaim it from the haters, like "Gay", "Nerd" or "Nigger", although those are often still used as pejoratives. Industry, government and the media happily call them "Pirates", abusing language to their advantage, just like they say "Stealing" instead of copyright violation, implying criminal action instead of civil and per-judging the morality. By calling themselves the Pirate Party the negative implications are directly challenged. Maybe in England they should call themselves the "Robin Hood Party" to confront the accusations of "Stealing".

      --
      tomorrow who's gonna fuss
    12. Re:My question to the party is... by rohan972 · · Score: 2

      As someone not generally affected by copyright issues, can they explain to me what benefits there are to society of reforming copyright? Tangible, measurable benefits.

      As the printing press and industrial age was the basis of a massive increase in wealth over the agrarian age, so the information age is a an increase of wealth over the industrial age. Copyright is affecting much more important things than the entertainment industries which I agree could disappear tomorrow without harm to society.

      Do you think we should have universal free education? Basic maths, such as learned in primary school, has not changed in the last hundred years yet if you have children you can check their textbooks and they will be protected by copyright. As a society we pay much more for education than we should because we limit supply of educational materials in this way.

      I agree with this quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson:
      Books constitute capital. A library book lasts as long as a house, for hundreds of years. It is not, then, an article of mere consumption but fairly of capital, and often in the case of professional men, setting out in life, it is their only capital.

      Software is also capital, directly used in production. Commodity hardware and software cause capital to be available for everyone. Restricting access to educational materials and productive capital in society seems like something that impacts us all, because we are treating information age productive goods as if they industrial age consumer goods, thereby destroying much of the utility of them.

    13. Re:My question to the party is... by next_ghost · · Score: 2

      No, they don't. When Rick Falkvinge started the party, the name Pirat Party was the obvious choice. But to realize that, you need to know a bit of background from 2005 Sweden. At the time, there were two well known organizations - the Pirate Bay (we all know what that is) and the Piratbyrån, an activist group of independent artists who made fun of big media and their campaign against piracy. The name Piratbyrån was in fact chosen to make fun of Antipiratbyrån (the Anti-Piracy Agency, subsidiary of big media). The name Pirate Party therefore associated the party with those well known (at least to the average Swede) organizations and people immediately knew what to expect.

      Pirate parties outside Sweden are in more difficult position because they have to establish their brand from scratch but there simply isn't any better name. Controversial name attracts attention. And on the other hand, people who'll dismiss the party just for its name without any interest in what the name stands for have to stay away from it at this point. If those people started influencing it before it's fully established, the party would implode. At this point, the party needs people who understand its core issues and their importance without lenghty explanations and therefore understand the name as well.

    14. Re:My question to the party is... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Flash forward to late 2002 and the chicken hawks are on the march again, there attempts to silence the opposition was to shout "we support the troops" and basically insinuate that if you are against the war, you want all American soldiers to die.

      Note more history - many people think this, because it was a fairly common theme during the latter part of the Vietnam era, when soldiers were being spit on by the civilians at home (literally, in some cases, when they came home).

      Hate the politicians for playing war, don't hate the soldiers who are required to fight them....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  8. Pirate party France by Yvanhoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In France the pirate party underwent a ridiculous war between two "factions" for several years. It has been reunited since several years but has been unable so far to present candidates in any major elections.

    European countries have different "details" in their election laws that make it easy or hard for small parties to be heard. For instance, in Germany, you receive public funds for your campaign when you reach 0.7% of votes. In France it is 5%.

    I think the most important vote for the French PP will be the European elections : this one has a proportional part. There are already , thanks to Sweden, several pirate European MPs and this election has the same rules everywhere. I hope we focus on it.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    1. Re:Pirate party France by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      I don't want to undermine the German's PP success that they totally deserve. They are dedicated, organized and coherent. I wish we had the same level of coherency in France. I am just pointing out that even with the same level of dedication, it would be harder to succeed here.

      1% is pretty hard, but 5% on a first election is downright impossible.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  9. UK is first past the post electoral system by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    The Pirate Party is totally irrelevant.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:UK is first past the post electoral system by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Party is totally irrelevant.

      Why?

    2. Re:UK is first past the post electoral system by Rhodri+Mawr · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Party is totally irrelevant here in the UK. I live in Worcester; their leader stood here at the last General election and he lost his deposit. He gained under 100 votes. There were joke candidates standing for charitable or mental health reasons who garnered more votes than him. They are not a visible group, did not and do not have voting power and are considered a joke by those in power, so they do not, as you wrongly claim, have the ability to shape the politics of those in power.

    3. Re:UK is first past the post electoral system by Ajehals · · Score: 1

      People seem to expect parties, groups and movements to come out of nowhere and storm to the top, in the UK that simply isn't doable, it takes time and effort. In 2010 the best result in the national election was 0.6% in Gorton, Manchester (with a candidate who had a manifesto and people knocking on doors..), in the local elections in Bury the party managed 3.6% of the vote - obviously a smaller area and different issues, but again, with people out talking to residents and putting forward positions. It's a progression, it won't go on forever, it may fail but it's worth doing. As to political power, the party has very little, where it has any influence at all it is through those people that have managed to raise their own profiles and end up on TV and radio presenting the other side, the party position. That helps a bit, but it certainly isn't the end game. The party needs to raise awareness of the issues it thinks are important and either threaten other partys in marginal seats/wards or find other ways of having other partys take similar positions to them. At present there isn't another party in the UK with similar positions on copyright reform, in fact I can't think of one that is going in the same direction...

  10. In Sweden by sita · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In Sweden they have had no influence whatsoever. You could compare them to one of those facebook campaigns. People are willing to show their sympathy for the thought that "everything should be free" (its the beer part that matter to people, In Sweden, we are not so much in to liberties), as long as it is effortless and doesn't cost anything. At the end of the day, taxes, interest rates, unemployment and day care is what sets the agenda.

    Sure they did well in the EP elections, but that's only because the EP is a phony parliament.

    What the PP did do is to vulgarize the debate to the point that no serious politician, whether interested in liberties or in economic efficiency, would dare to touch the issue of reforming the "intellectual property" system with a ten foot pole for the risk of being labeled a wingnut. Any legal system needs reform from time to time, but this issue has been put in the freezer.

    It is of course of no help that the founder and until recent party leader of PP is an alternative economy conspiracy theory wingnut.

    The bottom line is that the PP is not going anywhere as a political party until it has an opinion on day care. It is questionable whether it has it in itself of getting that, and if not it should stay out of elections. Be a thought smithy, lobby organization, discussion club, what ever, but don't pretend you belong in parliament.

    1. Re:In Sweden by ACS+Solver · · Score: 1

      Really? How's this for influence. The PP of course has people in the European Parliament, which is indeed not a very important institution, but it does stand over the European Commission so it's not exactly a high-school council. Next, they did manage to have 7.1% of the vote in European Parliament elections, which is a number indicative of some actual support and not just a fad.

      Rick Falkvinge, basically an unknown guy a few years ago, has become prominent enough to be named one of the top global thinkers along with major political figures and 2011 Arab revolutionaries.

      Something else that typically gets overlooked by those dismissive of the PP is that it has significant support among youth, people in their early 20s. And of course PP members are young. This is crucial - as someone else said in a recent /. discussion on copyright, these are the people who started using the Internet a decade ago in their early teens, and who were using the early popular filesharing programs (remember Napster or Kazaa?). These people are now old enough to vote, and they're having kids that they bring up with also a very liberal attitude to copyrights.

      No, I do not see the PP becoming a major political force in Sweden before the next election, but I fully expect support for them to rise, where soon enough mainstream politicians will also have to realize that the copyright issue is a very important one to a segment of voters.

    2. Re:In Sweden by tenchikaibyaku · · Score: 1

      You can't begin by saying that they have had no influence at all and then immediately go on to say that they have "vulgarized the debate" so much that politicians wouldn't even dare touch the issue. That's kind of impossible.

      I think you are wrong on both points. Both the green party and the left party now have stances on copyright that are very similar to the ones that the pirate party have propagated. The pirate party were also quite visible in the media at times, although I'm sure they were ignored by many.

      I think that the public debate before the entry of the pirate party (and the pirate bureau) was one of "I want free stuff" against "we need to pay the artists", after their entry it turned more sophisticated and idealogical. I think this is a good thing.

      Of course, there are also complete nuts in the party, and some of the arguments put forward aren't particularly good. I never really liked the former party leader.

      However, Christian Engström seems to be doing some good down in the European Parliament right now, and as a force against what I perceive to have been a very one-sided "we need longer copyrights, and we need to jail everyone as soon as they copy one song!!!1" discourse I think they have been a very valuable force.

    3. Re:In Sweden by Ajehals · · Score: 1

      >The bottom line is that the PP is not going anywhere as a political party until it has an opinion on day care. It is questionable whether it has it in itself of getting that, and if not it should stay out of election That is exactly that the party is doing now. The party has been through a number of elections and the people who involved themselves in those elections, the people from the party who were out on the ground either knew this already or learned rather quickly, it is also why the party is pushing on policy and anything it can do to have it's positions heard in one forum or another. As to vulgarizing the debate, I might have agreed a year ago (before I was a party member), indeed looking at some of the press stuff from the early days, the discussions etc.. it rings true to a certain degree, I would hope that this will change over the next few years as the party matures and learns, indeed that's what I am aiming for.

  11. Re:AVT+ voting by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    There was a referendum, which unfortunately the "Yes" campaign lost. They were outspent and outmaneuvered by those in power, who have so much vested interest in keeping the current system.

    The main advertising point was "you the voter are too stupid to understand an AV system"- and depressingly, the voters accepted it. Probably says a lot about the level of self belief the population in Britain have these days.

  12. maybe not... by Kristian+T. · · Score: 2, Informative

    Judging from the praise given to walled garden environments, like Apples app-store, I not so sure we can depend on technology to automatically free us from monitoring and control, by either government or big corp. However, such a fringe openion will never stand a chance in the 2 party systems of the US and UK. Even in the multiparty systems of continental Europe, the PP will struggle at elections, if it does not adopt some policy on mainstream subjects like employment and healthcare. Of course those passionate about the civic liberty agenda, will struggle to find agreement on the mainstream topics. (pardon my typos, I'm writing on an iPad. Can't wait to get back to my model M)

    --
    Run with the lemmings, and you'll get your feet wet.
    1. Re:maybe not... by coolmadsi · · Score: 5, Informative

      However, such a fringe openion will never stand a chance in the 2 party systems of the US and UK.

      There are 3 main parties in the UK (not 2, although two are larger than the other one). There are also a number of smaller parties that do get a few seats at elections, particularly for Wales and Scotland. That doesn't mean it is easy for a smaller party to get a seat, however.

    2. Re:maybe not... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Getting a seat in Westminster is very hard, because every constituency uses a first-past-the-post system. The smaller parties tend to do a lot better in the devolved assemblies and the EU parliament because those all use some form of PR (secondary party lists, multi-candidate constituencies, and so on). Getting a seat in Westminister requires getting 20-30% of the population in a single constituency to agree with you. This is especially hard since you have to compete with a large segment of the population who votes for X because they've always voted for X (in some cases, because their parents voted for X) without really bothering to know what X stands for.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  13. Not really easy to measure by Kjella · · Score: 2

    Their core issues have been under constant assault with harsher laws, less privacy and deterioration of due process. There's very little ground that's been gained, the question is how much more would have been lost without them. They've been in public debates, organized demonstrations, written opinion pieces for the papers and tried to influence other parties. The main battle has been for the public opinion, saying this is not wrong. This should not be illegal. It means a lot to have public faces saying that, a million people go speeding too but nobody stands up and says speed limits should be abolished. That it's not something you do just because you can get away with it, but that sharing is right.

    Lately here in Norway there's been a lot of articles saying in no unclear terms that the domestic book industry has purposely sabotaged the Norwegian eBooks. They've launched a service that's so poor, confusing and splintered that it's being called a planned failure. And of course, you won't find these books on international sites like Amazon, Apple etc. - it's their crappy "Book Cloud" or the paper edition. Did I mention that three companies own pretty much the whole domestic publishing industry and all the major bookshops? You wouldn't want to cut out the middle man when you are the middle man. What do I expect will fix it? Piracy. Lately piracy, not copyright has been the dominant source of innovation in the entertainment industry and they are dragged kicking and screaming along.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  14. Luxury diseases by sita · · Score: 2

    is why so many researchers are working on 'luxury' diseases instead of the disease that decimate the third-world, even in universities that should do fundamental research.

    While I agree to your general sentiment, I am not convinced about this.

    Many, if not most, of the diseases that cause large amount of suffering and deaths in the thrid world, are cureable with known science. That's why we don't have them in the first world. And it is not exactly rocket science either. DDT, mosquito nets and good draining will go a long way against malaria. Good sanitation and clean water (proper toilets!) will reduce the number of deaths in a large number of infectious diseases.

    AIDS is a big killer (but interestingly not the biggest), but it does get a lot of attention from first world medical research. There is a problem with how the third world is going to get the benefits of these advances, but it is not fundamentally different from how the third world gets the benefit of advances we do in other areas that could improve their lives (such as water treatment and sanitation). It is a problem being poor, you can't really afford it.

    The great news is that the situation is improving big time. (Google Hans Rosling for the full story)

    1. Re:Luxury diseases by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >And it is not exactly rocket science either. DDT, mosquito nets and good draining will go a long way against malaria.

      Mmm, DDT....
      Sure, because generations of children born with massive birth defects is a much smaller problem than malaria right ?
      After all, it's black people whose gonna notice right ?

      Fucking idiots... no DDT is NOT a solution. I may have had some sympathy if you said "short term DDT, eradicate it once, as soon as you have a malaria-free human population for one generation the mosquitos can't be infected and the problem is gone for good" - only that was tried in the past as well, it doesn't work. Large-scale DDT use produced DDT-resistent mosquitos, if anything they were WORSE !

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  15. Re:AVT+ voting by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    It wasn't just that. The referendum was not about AV+ (which was the proposed system by the last electoral reform commission and has a lot of advantages), but about pure AV, which has some advantages and some disadvantages. A lot of people voted 'No' meaning 'No, I don't want AV, but I do want a system better than FPTP'. This was exacerbated by the fact that a lot of Labour voters (and campaigners) wanted AV+ so were encouraging people to vote 'No' so that they could get AV+ on the ballot next time (which, of course, didn't happen, because every 'No' vote was interpreted as 'I am completely happy with FPTP and fear change'). If the referendum had been conducted fairly, it would have had options for FPTP, AV, and 'some other electoral system'. Or just FPTP and 'some other system'.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  16. Re:Pirate Party Antartica Looks Forward to Breakfa by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 2

    In a shocking turn of events, the leader of the Antartic upstart decides that the standard fare of oatmeal to be dull and uninspired, instead declaring that this year, eggs and bacon should grace the tables of their supporters. Guy Smiley agrees with this new direction whole-heartedly, and predicts a year where people will finally see a champion of change emerge for what are arguably the most important issues facing our planet.

    I'm guessing you were aiming for the high moral ground but just wound up sounding like a dick.

  17. A name change by SuperSlug · · Score: 2

    If they would change their name to the Privacy Party then they may find they do a lot better...

    --
    The information wants to be free, I just give it somewhere to go.
    1. Re:A name change by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Yes. This!

  18. Legitimate secrets only. by The+Creator · · Score: 1

    duh!

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  19. Re:Possible impact of the Pirat Parties by The+Creator · · Score: 1

    ..it potentially can capture all the discontents of the current systems.

    Yes, The Pirate Nazi Feminist Green Communist Party.

    They would be unstoppable!

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  20. Re:Confused? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    > FWIW, I'd say yes, you appear to be confused.

    Unfortunately, you can't (freely) administer one of the standard medical tests for that (or even the newest competing test) --- all because of the influence of copyright law. Perhaps, yes, this is the age of where the Pirate Parties' platforms progressively produce politically pleasing positions.

  21. All the good politicians go to London by Master+Of+Ninja · · Score: 1

    Certainly the devolved parliaments have a different election system than Westminister allowing smaller parties to get in, plus there is a tendency to more local politics there. However it is not helped by the fact that if you are ambitious or want to make a serious change it seems you go to Westminister, whereas there seems to be a lot of ineffectiveness in the devolved governments. The UK wide political parties inability to do well in the Scottish elections seems to be the fact that the candidates really aren't the cream of the crop and have quite poor policy platforms to stand on.

  22. Forty countries? by Geminii · · Score: 1

    It does kinda make me wonder - if they have representation in forty countries, you'd think they'd be able to come up with some way to hack the political system in at least one.

  23. that too is waste by r00t · · Score: 1

    I'm not about to get AIDS because somebody in the supermarket coughed 10 feet (3 meters) away from me. Almost nobody gets it from mosquito bites. It isn't spread by shaking hands. I won't get it from tap water. Uh, why are we wasting money on this?

    Meanwhile, tuberculosis is becoming extremely resistant to every antibiotic. There are mosquito-borne diseases right here in the USA that will make your brain swell up and bleed. An amoeba can survive tap water chlorination, get up into your nose, and then from there go after your brain. MRSA kills too many people to even think about. There are viruses that seem to cause leukemia and heart disease. The ever-present mouth bacteria attack heart valves. Then, oh yeah, non-contagious stuff like cancer and strokes and heart attacks and...

    It's horrid that an almost totally avoidable disease is sucking up research money that could go toward stopping numerous other diseases. Are we alarmed or even offended when some disease puts a crimp on our lifestyle, but unimpressed when one strikes people down randomly? People fear AIDS like they fear plane crashes, nuclear accidents, pedophiles, and terrorist attacks. People fear every other disease like they fear car crashes, coal pollution, muggers, and ordinary murderers.

  24. Well in Germany... by w4rl5ck · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... they are scaring the hell out of the "old" partys after scoring about 9% or so on the Berlin city parliament vote (which is important as Berlin is a county).

    Especially the FDP, which traditionally has hold the position of "freedom rights", is below threshold now and in big trouble - and most voters either head for the green's or the pirates.

    It's quite obvious that in the current situation, they will make it into the nations parliament on the next voting round; considering how hard it already is to find coalition partners in the parliament right now, that will be a very interesting situation.

  25. Naturally... by pellik · · Score: 1

    The alternative to looking forward to 2012 is looking back to 2012, which hardly seems appropriate seeing as we are only one week into the year.

  26. the $64,000 question... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    Hate the politicians for playing war, don't hate the soldiers who are required to fight them....

    That seems to be a key debate amongst antiwar activists - whether the average soldier is a victim or a perpetrator.
    Maybe it depends on the particular person involved - their reasons for going in and how they act once in service

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    1. Re:the $64,000 question... by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      I'd say it's simple: draftees should be honored, they didn't get a choice. Anybody who volunteers to go kill people deserve no respect at all in my book.

      But I will still say the assholes who sent them deserve even less.

      Granted I may be on the extreme side - but I grew up in a country mid-in a secret war that was fought with drafted soldiers - I know what it's like to live in a nation where 80% of the adult men I know are PTSD sufferers largely untreated (because the military taught them only faggots go to shrinks) who drink and beat their wives. Now of course, some would have been alcholohics and wife beaters anyway - but there's no discounting that the bush war (Angolan bush - nothing to do with the US presidents) made a lot more.
      I also don't think it's an excuse for their actions - they are responsible for what they do with the shit they were given, but that doesn't mean I don't hate the politicians who gave them the shit.

      The interesting thing is that in 1992 when an electorate made up entirely of people who had fought in that war (and their wives) was asked whether to negotiate with "enemy" they'd been chosen to kill (in a time when "negotiate" meant - let them rule the country, we'll just discuss the system of government they get to use) they overwhelmingly (69%) voted for the peaceful coexistence and majority rule by the same people they had been shooting a few years before.

      To put it otherwise ... the vast majority of those drafted soldiers hated the war, didn't agree with it or what was being fought for. Even as they bought some of the propaganda, they still hated it, came back broken men whose consciences let them suffer to sleep for ever -and when they got the chance - voted to (basically) surrender.

      I think you'll find the same pattern for every war- the vast majority of people who go will end up believing they never should have. A significant majority of the rest will be claiming how right their cause was - mostly to try and convince themselves that their actions wasn't as evil as they keep feeling it was... and a small minority will be convinced that they did a wonderful job. We can place the kind of value systems that allow ANY military action to ever be "a good deed" by the types of society they are associated with: honor, bravery, courage ... these are the values that sociologies ascribe to a society that is barbaric, and they are the values that proud soldier embrace because only barbarians can be proud soldiers.

      Yes, I know I'll get flamed (and likely modded way down) for that... bring it on, it won't make me wrong.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    2. Re:the $64,000 question... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      Considering Milgram and other such experiments on authority, it does make sense to place more blame on the higher-ups.
      Nuremberg says that following orders is not an excuse, but note that those on trial at Nuremberg were some of the highest-ranking Nazis. Also, the SS was declared a criminal organization, but Waffen-SS draftees were excluded from that classification. (Yes, a Godwin, but an on-topic one)

      Maybe you can't blame everybody who believes propaganda, but you can blame those who have it made. (whether pro-war propaganda in general or propaganda in favor of a particular war)

      PS
      What would you say about conscription resistance?

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  27. common minor party dynamic by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    Both the green party and the left party now have stances on copyright that are very similar to the ones that the pirate party have propagated.

    sounds like a fairly common minor party dynamic - even if not directly successful, a strong presence leads larger parties to adjust their positions accordingly.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  28. PP and Freedom of Software in Russia by vleo · · Score: 1

    I'm a member of Russian Pirate Party ( http://pirate-party.ru/ ). Of course it is not officially registered one, since until now regulations are rather tough for new party registration in Russia. One attempt was declined in 2011 with a reason given - "High Sea piracy is illegal in Russia".

    Official Powers in Russia are tolerant with PP agenda - one can remember famous Microsoft vs. school director Ponosov case (Putin sided in favour of Ponosov, who was acquitted eventually), Government Order No. 2299-p, that mandates transition to Free Software by 2015 for all Govt. agencies (which is an official term for Govt. documents), and few months ago President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev held a meeting with Internet activists where the Pirate Party of Russia was invited.

    Having said that, there is multitude of criminal cases on basis of Criminal Code articles 271-272 (unauthorised access and viral software) and 146 (copyright related violations), mostly against people selling unapproved software and anti-copy protection code on CDs, as well as people installing same as a service. So far, very few cases of prosecution attempts (without much success) for personal/private use of unlicensed software are known.

    --
    Vassili Leonov ...it is the actions that affect us, not the motive...RMS
    1. Re:PP and Freedom of Software in Russia by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Official Powers in Russia are tolerant with PP agenda - one can remember famous Microsoft vs. school director Ponosov case (Putin sided in favour of Ponosov, who was acquitted eventually)

      That's funny, I heard that Microsoft didn't want to prosecute, but the government said that because it was a criminal offense in Russia that not prosecuting wasn't an option. That doesn't sound like the government being tolerant with the Pirate agenda...

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".