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

[Reinier Bakels]

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Will Pomes 
  To: Pirate Parties International -- General Talk 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 2:13 AM
  Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?


  dear rienier,


  BUT, could you please follow the general convention of not adding your reply within a subset (in this example, containing your whole message) titled "original message" ?

  I don't know what you mean. I have some difficulty because these mails are in a format that does not allow > and >> designations for the original text. So  use colors. Or do they get lost in your mailer? They don't in  Carlos' mailer - he loudly complained about my use of colour ...  

  Sometimes we just have to realize that what will be accomplished is what is what it is. Politics is unpredictable, like litigation.
  And sometimes it is necessary to do something that will draw criticism. in our case, perhaps more often.

  However, you are right in that in order to accomplish anything, we do have to focus our efforts, otherwise they will just get buried underneath all the normal legislation and day to day business,

  I also agree with you on the danger of the human rights arguement, at least before we accomplish at least some of the objectives stated in the Manifesto, or in the general platforms of each party.

  Thanks for the support. The fact of the matter is that it requires experience to know what arguments work, what arguments don't work and what arguments are used in an adverse effect. I won't claim much experience but I do have some experience. 

  On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Reinier Bakels <r.bakels at pr.unimaas.nl> wrote:

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Carlos Ayala Vargas 
      To: Pirate Parties International -- General Talk 
      Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:13 AM
      Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] where is the manifesto?


      Prior to replying you: why do you have to turn your mail into the Rainbow warrior? I mean, please don't use so many colours in a single mail, it hurts my eyes.

      There was black and blue, and I added red. If you (or your eyes) get upset because of a third color (or actually a second, other than black), I really wonder what is going on. 

      Reinier Bakels wrote: 
          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.
      The lobbies actual and falsely advocate human rights to justify their liberticide measures; are you willing to allow them to do it? If not, I think you should advocate human rights while proving they abuse and falsely interprete human rights.

      It is not 100% sure that your interpretation is right and the others are wrong ... besides, politics does not always follows the lines of logic. My estimate is that there is a substantial risk that the human rights argument is used to strengthen both the contents and the enforcement of "intellectual propeerty", i,.e, to achieve exactly the opposite from PP objectives. This is based on my perception on the way the human rights argument is used today in this context.  

          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. 

      They can say whatever they want; they can say we are massaging you while they beat you, or we are supporting human rights while violating them -they did in Spain with the implementation of 2000/31/EC, allowing censorship without prior court ruling (against Spanish Constitution)-. Our duty is to prove they lie; it is part of our opposition tasks.

      Again, the substance of human rights considerations in this context is by no means unambiguous. They will juxtapose their "truth" with your "truth". In my view, in such a situation it is easier to defend rights directly than to follow the risky detour via human rights.  

          Two aspects: 1. If you choose a certain emphasis, you can't do other things.
      False. If I become a MP, I won't be a MP just to attend one issue of the set of core issues, during an entire term! Me, and the rest of pirate who eventual and hypothetically would nail seats at the parliaments, would fight to achieve all goals, making as many as possible.

      It is good to be ambitious. But it is usually helpful to set priorities. Of course your energy (or the energy of whoever other PP parliament member) is infinite. But you should also take the "processing power" of the outside world in consideration. Doing too much may confuse your voters.  


      If I become a MP, I won't aim for a 5 % of the platform of the party where I belong, or for a 15 %, or for a 20 % -of course I won't aim against that platform-; I'll work for 100 %, and time and dealing skills will determine the final % of achieved goals.

          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.
      Thus, we have to work in order to avoid that and revert the tide, haven't we? Precisely due to lobbies trying to enlenghten the abuse, we have to work, first, to stop the enlengthening, and at the same time, to revert it.

          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.  

      I'm a young man at my 28 years; how many years do you have in mind? Politics are a set of short, middle & long-term efforts; we are not going to give up on them just because you state "they cannot be achieved prior to the end of the current term".
      Again, priorities, in conjunction with long-term visions, are helpful. Note however that you will be faced by people saying: if you try to change TRIPS (in a direction of less protection), then you are simply naive ... and then you better be prepared to answer that question, because it is a pretty logical question.  


          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.
      I did: reducing term & scope of commercial rights, allowing non commercial filesharing, etc; and that's concerning author's rights ... as we saw last summer there are other core issues for pirate parties, Reinier; you're not going to take such issues away from our platforms.


      Oh no, I did not mean to say that the list was exhaustive, and I wasserious when I invited you to add more items.

      reinier 

    ____________________________________________________
    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/20081230/13cb572b/attachment-0001.htm>