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

[Rick Falkvinge (Piratpartiet)]

> I did not say it is the definitive answer. It is a start. And it is a 
> major departure from a conception that only the interests of the 
> authors are to be considered. Well, I am aware that you moved beyond 
> that, Richard, but not everyone is as brilliant (and as honest) as you 
> are.
In my experience, it is a mistake to not take an intellectually 
defensible position from the outset. I have blogged and argued a lot 
about this.

It is true that copyright is about balance, but the rightsholders are 
not repeat not legitimate stakeholders in that balance. It is a balance 
between the PUBLIC's interest of spreading, using and partaking and 
culture, and the SAME PUBLIC's interest of having more culture develop 
and refine.

It is true that rightsholders are AFFECTED by the copyright legislation. 
But like a small military town is affected by the national security 
policy (say, if its regiment is closed), that national security policy 
should not be written with the military town's welfare in mind: other 
political programs will have to see to that. Likewise, copyright 
legislation needs to explicitly exclude the rightsholders from having a 
say in its wording.

To say that they are part of the balance means that they somehow can 
agree or not agree to new legislation. That's insanely backwards -- 
that's just as if the abovementioned military town were to be given to 
accept or reject a new national security policy.

I'd go as far as to say that PP.se cannot support a writing that 
explicitly grants rightsholders a say in the wording of copyright 
legislation.

Rick