[pp.int.general] WIPO DG mentions Pirate Party in speech to Blue Sky conference

[Amelia Andersdotter]

On 02.03.2011 14:57, Mikulas.Ferjencik wrote:
>
> It is way easier to explain that Intelectual Property does not exist, rather then attempting to explain what we want to do with it.
>

It's certainly easier to claim that, but it's also false. If you look at 
for instance the Basel I-III frameworks for global financial regulation 
(which was the one that just recently failed because Basel II had a 
loophole that made it possible to judge risk in a weird way. I can 
explain this further but will sit och the information until someone 
explicitly asks me because it's boooriiiiiing) for instance, 
intellectual property rights are very much property rights, even "firm 
assets" (note: FIRM) that can be used for assessing the risk of giving 
someone a loan or the security in giving someone an insurance for giving 
someone a loan.

ah. that was a basic explanation of loophole use. anyway, if the first 
and second loanTAKERS in the above situations hold IPR assets, they are 
perceived to be less risky than they would otherwise be. The associated 
documents/obligations describing the debt are a further form of 
(intellectual) property than can also be bought and sold between 
different actors. It's a great way of generating GDP, and a less great 
way of organising an economy (apparently).

anyway, the european parliament is looking into a tax on financial 
transactions which i do not entirely understand how it would work, but i 
have also not (yet) looked into the Tobin theory which was written 
post-Basel II and therefore is /probably/ interesting in this context.

/a

> regards
>
> Mikulas PPCZ
>
>