[pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?
r.bakels at pr.unimaas.nl
Mon Dec 29 23:59:17 CET 2008
As I explained in another mail, the human rights route imnsho is unlikely to be productive, and may even be counter-productive.
Defending human rights, having them as reference, is never improductive nor counter-productive. The Data Retention Directive, e.g., proves how necessary is to never forget that author's rights are not our only issue.
If you are prepared to accept the risk of an extension of "intellectual property rights" e.g. copyright, and very tough enforcement measures, yes, there is no risk in advocating human rights. Again, the DRD was defended with the argument that it supports human rights (e.g. of the authors, and the potential victims of terrorism), perhaps at the expense of privacy, but who cares? Please note these are not my arguments, but still arguments accepted in politics by a majority.
Striving for a reduction of the copyright term is a VERY large term option, not because it is unimportant, but merely judged from a feasibility perspective.
If you have 1 MP out of 350, are you not demanding anything because of not having enough majority? It's your duty as MP to demand it, because your voters demand it. Later, when new elections arrive, you can remind voters that you were unable to achieve the desired goals because of not enough electoral support -thus, asking for more votes to have more weight at the parliaments-. Never forget that feasibility, assuming that we follow rule of law, depends only on the amount of MPs; for the reduction of commercial rights term & scope, and for the rest of topics you enlisted -and many more you forgot-; thus, such reduction have to be pursued by us in the short, middle and long term; short-term unfeasibility (due to lack of MPs) shouldn't prevent us to pursue our goals, as long as they remain our goals.
Two aspects: 1. If you choose a certain emphasis, ypou can't do other things. So you better choose to address problems that you realistically can resolve in the foreseeable future. Copyright and patent term reductions require cumbersome international negotiations. The present political mood is to strengthen rather than weaken copyright etc. The US imposes "TRIPS plus" conditions in bilateral treaties to many (developing) nations. The deal is easier access to the world market for (conventional) goods. But even if the political "weather forecast" would be more favourable, such a process would take many years.
But various other reforms can indeed me productive:
Those reforms are as not feasible -at least in Spain (because there are pure symbiosis between SGAE and the Socialist Workers Party), I don't know how things work in Netherlands- as reducing copyright term & scope. Are you going to leave them aside in the short & middle term?
Well, some of the reforms I propose can even be made in court.
- is the list long enough?
Not for pirate parties, in the light of our several ideologies and national platforms.
Then add something to the list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the pp.international.general