[pp.int.general] Sorting out communication (was Re:constituting pirate-property )

[Jouni Snellman]

These days it´s difficult to determine what is "state" and what is
"industry.", there is no real difference between them if you look at what
they are doing. But these two seem to be all that is left of what used to be
called "Government." Millions of people with nothing left to work for except
their privileges.

On 7/12/07, Amelia Andersdotter <teirdes at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I didn't follow the coining of terms discussions so I must have
> misunderstood. I apologise.
>
> As for common goals, I think they will be difficult.
>
> A quick comparison between FSF and its various international branches
> that I made shows that their international organisation has very
> different goals depending on where they work.
>
> A similar comparison with Fifth International, which does have common
> goals between all its branches, gives me the impression that you get
> very secluded, small, elitist branches for most part and only as an
> exception organisations that could be given any kind of credit at
> grass root movements.
>
> >From a political perspective, common goals are as far as I can see,
> useless. However, say you'd put up goals like "number of active
> members" or "number of successful campaigns (educational or
> otherwise)" and that would make a lot more sense.
>
> > A political movement is only an industry group representing the
> consumers
> > that also puts people up for election. Of course, you could also see an
> > international body as being a global industrial body - the global
> industry
> > being that of 'pirate parties' since the international body isn't
> putting anyone
> > up for election, and is not itself a political party.
>
> I beg to differ. An industry in our current economical system makes
> money. We do not.
>
> Our opponents are an industrial lobby group in the sense that their
> industry makes lots and lots of money. Every branch of their industry
> has the money making and protection of that money making in common. We
> do not.
>
> I'm sorry if I'm being too argumentative.
>
> Amelia Andersdotter
> Piratpartiet Sweden
>
> On 11/07/07, Andrew Norton <andrew.norton at pirate-party.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:11:24 +0200, "Amelia Andersdotter" <
> teirdes at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm sorry for the rather late replies here:
> > >
> > > On 14/06/07, Andrew Norton <andrew.norton at pirate-party.us> wrote:
> > >> The subject of 'terms definition' is something that I've had on the
> PPUS
> > >> agenda since early March at least. I was hoping to get together with
> > >> people/groups like the EFF, LEssig, and even an offer to the
> MPAA/RIAA
> > >>
> > >
> > > This is a likely PPUS setup for discussing such terms. They're US
> > > people, so US responsibility. The term definition at hand may also
> > > only be applicable to the US. I will explain:
> >
> > Regardless, the 'terms' are used internationally. not nly by the RIAA
> and MPAA, for isntance, but the IFPI, and MPA. News organisations are the
> same, BBC, AP, Reuters, CNN, Fox/sky - all use the same terms
> internationally. A technical or scientific term, moreso than legal terms,
> means the same things the world over. Why shouldn't 'piracy' et al be
> defined as a technical term?
> >
> >
> > >
> > >> Of cours, the bigger thing is not the WHAT, but the WHO. Who will
> make
> > >> these terms definitions? [...] It comes a lot better from a unified
> > > international
> > >> group, than an individual country.
> > >
> > > True enough.
> > >
> > >> Therein lies a problem. Right now, we don't really
> > >> have an 'international group' per se.
> > >
> > > That's because we're working within our respective systems to change
> > > those systems. Between themselves, the systems we work within vary a
> > > lot between the different countries.
> > >
> > > I would like to reference to the Fourth and Fifth International, which
> > > *were* international movements. On the positive side for *them*,
> > > *they* are planning to _overthrow_ the system, not change it.
> > > (http://www.fifthinternational.org/)
> >
> > Indeed, This was something I had to explain to a Chinese journalist just
> this weekend - Us political parties are not allowed to advocate breaking the
> law. The furthest they can do, is advocate change in the law to enable
> something. Hence the libertarian party's policy of decriminalisation of pot.
> >
> > >
> > > In Sweden we've said we only wish to change certain things, and we
> > > certainly do not aspire to become the ruling class. That makes
> > > international coordination of politics very difficult, since each
> > > pirate party start their quest for change from very different starting
> > > points.
> >
> > Would perhaps setting an international standard set work? Its hard for
> me to explain, but imagine having a set of 'awards' as it were, with
> prerequisits to gain these. A bronze might be 'copyright terms of 50 years,
> patent terms of 20, fair use allowed, fair use circumvention of DRM
> allowed". It's imperfect, yes, but its some sort of aproximate metric to
> help guage each others progress, AND give us targets to work at or for that
> are globally recognised.
> >
> > >
> > > An international group could function mostly as a signature in very
> > > specific situations, or for sharing news with one another, and for
> > > getting support when times are hard. The actual reformist work would
> > > have to be led by each country.
> >
> > An international group can act as you've said, but not just 'specific
> situations' but indeed situations involving more than one country.
> Nextstep09 was an Austrian event, but involved and was participated in by
> multiple countries.
> >
> > >
> > >> I do however think its impact might have been better if it came from
> the
> > >> international group,
> > >
> > > FFII or FSF must have different affilials overseas and in Europe. How
> > > have they managed to cross this political bridge and become unified. I
> > > think we should probably look at other organisations and see how
> > > they've arranged their movements.
> > >
> > >> Instead it puts them out as being from the MPA - the international
> body.
> > >>
> > >
> > > That's because they're a global industry. We're a political movement
> > > so it's harder for us to pull this off.
> >
> > A political movement is only an industry group representing the
> consumers that also puts people up for election. Of course, you could also
> see an international body as being a global industrial body - the global
> industry being that of 'pirate parties' since the international body isn't
> putting anyone up for election, and is not itself a political party.
> >
> >
> > Andrew Norton
> > Pirate Party US
> >
> >
> > >
> > > //amelia
> > > ____________________________________________________
> > > Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> > > pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > > http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> >
> > ____________________________________________________
> > Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> > pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> > http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
> >
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20070712/d41fa320/attachment.htm