[pp.int.general] Assistance from the PP USA

[Ray Jenson]

EVERYONE!

This is assistance as I have been able to garner from the members here
in the past 24 hours regarding both the COE treaty and the recent action
in Sweden. Since the COE is the less difficult of the two, I will cover
that first.

I would appreciate feedback on these. I'm good at coming up with
spur-of-the-moment contingencies, but the more ideas we have on these
two concepts, the better it will be for everyone involved.

You see, this is happening in Europe, but what one nation does, the
others want to do with their own people. By proxy, that means that our
responsibility to one another is increased, but also the capability of
those in power to step on those less powerful in order to get more power
is increased. The stakes are higher. What happens in Europe today may
very well echo in any other part of the world, from Africa and South
America to the United States.

In essence, these are opportunities for us, but we must act quickly in
order to be able to take advantage of them. These are what I see:

COUNCIL OF EUROPE

We were going over the treaties that the COE has been discussing, and
we've discovered a few "speaking points" that we hope will help you in
making statements about it.

First of all, let me give everyone the links so that they don't have to
go back and look them up.

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/185.htm

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/189.htm

These two are written in a way which is vague, and this is something
that we feel compelled to try to support open demonstration against. The
point of this action is not actually to decry the law, but to point out
that it does nothing but strip people of their rights. It is essentially
equating file-sharing (and computer hacking) to hate crimes, xenophobia,
and racism. The point of this kind of demonstration is to garner a
little more public support and to show that you can be effective. It is
fairly certain than any amount of light shed on this will lead to its
demise, but we can benefit in the process by ensuring that a silent
consent is not given.

Be sure to praise their dedication to transparency this time around. *G*

SWEDEN

We need to send the PPSE monetary support in order to cover postage for
letter-writing campaigns and especially travel since honorariums are not
highly likely. Since there isn't any regulation of the sources of funds
for the Pirate Party in Sweden, I think the influx of donations could be
very beneficial. Rick, what do you think? May we donate on your behalf?

For the next part, please keep in mind that I am not from Sweden, and so
I could be incorrect on several points. However, this may give some
"food for thought" so that activities may be planned.

Those of you in Sweden should encourage people to write letters which
essentially demand a guarantee on individual privacy (whether or not
this includes the copyright infringement laws is immaterial, since one
cannot be invoked without the other, in this case), since this kind of
end-run around the justice system is not only against the ideals of
having a free and open society, it may actually violate the neutrality
clause of Sweden, because the core of the companies behind this action
(as well as the external pressures that are mounting) are in essence
influencing Swedish law. While it's acceptable to abide by one's own
laws, and to uphold a treaty which has been signed, it is not acceptable
to use one to justify violating the other.

Sweden's laws are such that neutrality must be maintained. The external
influences of these companies on Swedish law shows a tendency to go with
the money which is being generated in Sweden, with a portion of it being
sent back to the central corporations here in the United States as
"licensing fees" or "administrative fees" or whatever other
justifications they may have. In such cases where the external influence
is clear, neutrality is absolutely in peril, and Sweden's neutrality is
its primary strength.

Sweden may be viewed as a "haven for copyright infringement" by the
outside world, but in essence it means that the outside world is gauging
Sweden by their own laws, not by Swedish law. The WTO and WIPO treaties
of the last decade may actually themselves violate the neutrality of
Sweden, and so may be illegal for Sweden to have signed, particularly if
all they are going to be used for is essentially controlling the way
that the Swedish Parliament creates the laws.

In addition, standing up for artists and innovators means denying the
one thing that exploits them: the transfer of the sole right of use to
the company. Artists MUST benefit by maintaining their own rights to the
work, and so this may be something of an alternative that swings the
argument back into favor with our side. If the goal (as is stated by
Beatrice Ask and Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth in their joint statement in
Svenska Dagbladet) is to retain the right to their own material, then
they need to CUT OUT the middleman, not enhance him.

In all, try to help the lawmakers understand that the real issue at hand
is not the protection of art, but the idea that they are trading away
both that protection and the right to privacy (which is the truth,
unpopular as it may be). This is what they need to avoid doing.

Treat it as if the law is going forward anyway, but suggest changes to
improve it. Something needs to happen, it's merely a matter of what. And
if they can make it protect individual artists and stick it to the
foreign companies, so much the better. It's less to have to undo later,
though it will still need to be undone.

You see, legislators (even Swedish ones) feel that they are ineffective
unless they're passing laws that have popular impact. Thus, you are
supporting them in their jobs by suggesting changes to the legislation.
Even if they don't include your points, someone else might. It's a
matter of coordinating efforts at this point.

You can be effective, Sweden. I've seen it. It's a matter of keeping
that efficacy until a time when Sweden is once again a model of
maintaining neutrality and yet still benefiting from it.

IN THE END...

...it's all up to you. You must decide what's best for the situation.
Good as some of these ideas might be, the ideas by themselves won't make
them happen. And even the bad ideas can still help you think about what
really needs to happen. Since you're in the situation, it's up to you to
act, and decide what's most important. While I can advise and submit
even more ideas, it all boils down to the fact that I'm not a Swedish
citizen, nor am I even a European; I'm an American. But I'm still human,
and my goal is still the freedom of all people in the world.

So, as a citizen of the world, please let me say that if you need any
help that I can offer, it's yours for the asking.

Sincerely,

Ray Jenson
Operations Officer
Pirate Party of the United States

-- 
"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to
give validity to his convictions in political affairs."

"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every
man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance
in the entire population."

                           --both quotes by Albert Einstein