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

[Reinier Bakels]

Hi Richard,
Recently, there have been several commens on the role of lawyers on this
list. being one of them, I owe you an explanation.
1. The purpose of politics is to make or change laws (in a democratic
manner). The present law obviously can not be decisive for making new laws -
that is indeed a common mistake, and you are right to point it out.
2. Still it must be acknowledged that copyright etc. are subject to
international treaties, notably the Berne Convention (+Paris for patents),
and TRIPS. For Europe, there are European directives. Changing these is not
impossible, but very hard, in particular because thedemocracy at this level
is deficient (PP must change that! in EU in particular), and the currently
prevailing direction is towards more and stronger protection.
3. Furthermore, there are human rights, either codified or non-codified. If
one concludes that a human right should be changed, one should think twice -
and investigate the reason for such a right. Some human rights provisions
can be changed by a (complicateed) democratic process, but others can't,
like the first 20 articles of the German constitution - which include the
"protection of property" provision.

And of course, conceivably there are non-legal options too, from civil
disobedience to revolution.

Abolishment of existing copyrights (not the "abstract" law, but concrete
rights owned by individuals pertaining to specific works) without full
compensation can ONLY be achieved by the kind of "non-legal" methods I just
described. Is the PP aiming at a revolution? Judge yourself.

But - to end with better news - *even* lawyers increasingly consider the
*application* (exercise) of specific rights inappropriate, either for humn
rights or more down-to-earth competition law reasons. In this approach the
right itself is not questioned, but certain ways to exercise it are deemed
in appripriate, and eventually illegal. E.g. copyright may not be used to
obstruct the freedom of information human right unduly. Microsoft may not
abyuse its patents to block competition. And so on.

So lawyers are not just obstacles for PP objectives, they also can bring
solutions!

----- 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: Friday, December 26, 2008 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?


> No matter what bulwarks are erected to prevent the reversal of laws
> that increment unjust private power, we must never accept them as
> legitimate.
>
> For the Pirate Party to accept your position would require abandoning
> the goal for which it was founded.  It seems to me that the
> abandonment of that goal is precisely what you are arguing for.
> You are doing it with defeatism.
>
> In politics, defeatism is a form of opposition.  People who want to
> work for political change must not stand for defeatism.
>
> Defeatism tends toward exaggeration: for instance, to urge people to
> give up on a goal world-wide because it is impossible in Germany
> is clearly an exaggeration.
>
> But is it really impossible in Germany?  Or is it only difficult?
> Have you perhaps disregarded certain roads to success because they are
> long?  Even if most of the specific points you made are accurate, you
> may have overlooked a way that might work.
>
> It is important to talk with lawyers to get advice about what roads to
> success are available.  But don't talk with a lawyer that disparages
> the goal.  Talk with a lawyer that wants to help you succeed.