[pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto: PIRATA internal ballot, results

[Reinier Bakels]

> Reinier,
> so you are against/in disagreement with:
If you phrase it this way, yes, apparently I disagree with almost 
everything. Indeed I have serious concerns about the *presentation*. But I 
full subscribe to most *practical* goals of the Swedish PP and the German 
(+Hessian) PP. What is the reason for the paradox. Let me summarise my 
position on each of these items:

> * the strategy
Is there an explicit strategy? Or do you really mean the sum of all items 
below?

> * the philosophy/principles
In my perspective, eventually the purpose is to get to a more balanced 
policy on "information" = so-called intellectual property, and privacy. Does 
this differ from the PP philosophy/principles you had in mind?

> * the civil rights/human rights approach
Yes, here is a strong disagreement, because these arguments are indirect and 
potentially counter-productive. The UNDR puts the interests of the rights 
owners first, and the (envisaged) European Charter (part of the Lisbon 
treaty) apparently does the same. And many people tend to believe that 
privacy should be sacrificed for the sake of safety (also a human right!) 
and to protect the property rights of authors (allegedly also a human 
right). Rather than contesting those arguments, it is much easier to address 
the related practical issues directly.

> * the copyright extension
I certainly do not object against copyright extension! (I actively 
cooperated in the present struggle against the extension of neighbouring 
rights - did you?). You probably mean that I object copyright term 
*reduction*. Indeed, because this is an unrealistic proposal (for 
"technical" reasons I won't elaborate here again), and such proposals may 
backfire and become counter-productive. Furthermore, there are plenty of 
opportunities for more realistic copyright reform proposals.

> * the transparency/accountability issue
Yes, for the reasons I already gave, and because it is a topic unrelated to 
the prime (=other) PP objectives. In my perception, the PPs should not 
oppose the present political system, but exploit it. The reason that for 
instance mass surveillance is adopted in SE and DE is that there are 
political majorities allowing that to happen, because voters do not 
understand the issue and/or there are no political parties (not yet!) to 
voice opposition against mass surveillance.

> * the manifesto, the amendments
The net effect of the above concerns indeed is that I disagree on the 
Manifesto proposals. My understanding is that only a few PPs cooperated on 
the Manifestos last year, and many others quitted the project after flame 
wars. So not supporting the manifesto's frankly is not the same as not 
suporting the PP ideals!

> * the "pirate" name
I only said that I was not entirely convinced. Again, the question is 
whether the name supports the purpose, or may be counter-productive. 
Actually I was more or less convinced, but then I talked recently to the 
chairman of a (pretty successful) activist group in The Netherlands. He was 
excited about the idea of establishing a political party, but he abhorred 
the "pirate" designation spontaneously.
>

reinier