[pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?

[Reinier Bakels]

Perhaps the confusion is simple. A conceptual distinction must be made 
between THE copyright law, and A (subjective) copyright. The former (i.e. 
the rules) can - of course - be changed. Legislators may decide tomorrow (or 
right after Christmas) that new works will not be covered by copyright 
anymore (well, the supporters of the UN view will protest - and, 
realistically, we talk about changes rather than plain abolishment). It is 
the latter type of right (not law) that is protected by human rights 
provisions.

In the imaginary case that copyright is abolished tomorrow, then it will 
continue to cover works created until today, for life+70 years. Unless the 
copyright owners will be compensated. But - like in any other case of 
expropriation - the procedure is not easy. If someone is not willing to 
agree voluntarily on a compensation, then it is probably up to a court to 
decide. But such an operation is will simply not be affordable, especially 
in a time of financial crisis.

Groeten, Grüße, Regards, Cordialement, Hälsningar, Ciao, Saygilar, 
Üdvözlettel, Pozdrowienia, Kumusta, Adios, Oan't sjen, Ave, Doei, Yassou, 
Yoroshiku, Slán, Vinarliga, Kær Kveðja
>>> REINIER B. BAKELS PhD LL.M. MSc
private: Johan Willem Frisostraat 149, 2713 CC Zoetermeer, The Netherlands 
telephone: +31 79 316 3126, GSM ("Handy") +31 6 4988 6490,  fax +31 79 316 
7221
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard M Stallman" <rms at gnu.org>
To: "Reinier Bakels" <r.bakels at planet.nl>
Cc: <pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2008 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?


>
>     But existing rights must be =
>    respected until they expire - or the owner must be compensated. The =
>    reason is actually pretty obvious. If I write something, I get the =
>    copyright, and I may sell the copyright to someone else, e.g. the =
>    publisher. Because he has paid the money, he can expect the government 
> =
>    to protect his purchase.
>    Of course, a true pirate will wonder
>
> That position amounts to a blanket defense of privatization above
> human rights.  Ethically it must be rejected.  Legally it must be
> abolished.
>
> To reduce the term of copyright only for future works is insufficient.
> The Pirate Party must confront the injustice of that position, and the
> invalid ethical premises it is based on, or else abandon its principal
> goal.
>
> There is only one stand to take: if copyright can be lengthened then
> it can be shortened.  If copyright power can be increased then it can
> be decreased.