[pp.int.general] Other (no sot good) reaction to MU joint complaint campaign

[Justus Römeth]

I do understand that. I think most of PPDE understands that. But that
doesn't mean that our media will understand it, or that they or the other
parties won't use it against us, even if we try to explain it to them. And
if that happens the part of the public that we need to win over to make the
5% threshold in the upcoming elections in Schleswig Holstein and Saarland,
where we stand at 5 and 4 % respectively won't understand it neither. (Not
to mention that it will likely not make a big difference for the success of
the lawsuit whether PPDE takes part in it or not), our political and legal
system is quite geared to not make the US angry at us again, somewhat
understandably ;-)

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Choms <choms at botmania.net> wrote:

> 2012/1/29 Justus Römeth <squig at dfpx.de>
>
>> Moin Kenneth
>>
>> We are (or rather our leadership is) slow, so actually there is nothing
>> decided yet.
>>
>> IMO all you write is true, but smaller PPs can win much more than PPDE in
>> this case, we already have our name out there.
>>
>
> I agree with that point, because media can be harmful, but I think, in
> that case, the best thing is just to keep a low profile and not to say
> anything (just like time ago with Anonymous movement :P) because whatever
> you do, it will be harmful. So I agree it could be better not to say
> anything in favor or against it, but I only want to you to understand that
> isn't about MU, but about a violation of costumers rights, seizure of data,
> privacy, etc.
>
>
>> Anyways, it's not like we actually oppose you, is it? Afaik nobody
>> official from PPDE has put forward an opinion to the matter, everything
>> else were just individual opinions.
>>
>> Having said that, the fact that the US is more of a police state than we
>> would like, and that it is unlikely anybody is gonna get his data back is a
>> shame, but probably nothing a court ruling in Europe will change. And I
>> doubt we could win a case in the US (if we were to try that we should get
>> the EFF on board, however).
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> -J
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Kenneth Peiruza <kenneth at pirata.cat>wrote:
>>
>>>  PP-DE is acting SHAMEFULLY in this case.
>>>
>>> What about the personal data of people using MU? didn't you had a
>>> principle about defending privacy?
>>>
>>> Shame.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Al 29/01/12 15:37, En/na Choms ha escrit:
>>>
>>> Presumption of innocence? Oh, wait, that doesn't exists on the US... if
>>> so, imho, you have to wait for a trial before condemn someone... but who
>>> cares about justice? :)
>>>
>>> 2012/1/29 Christian Hufgard <pp at christian-hufgard.de>
>>>
>>>> On 29.01.2012 11:29, Josep Sànchez wrote:
>>>> >>  You are also allowed to lose your money by investing in criminal
>>>> >> stock companies.
>>>> >
>>>> > That's not the actual situation. In my country when anybody does any
>>>> > action it is responsible for the collateral damages it might cause,
>>>> and
>>>> > it's even more serious if they could have avoided or previewed them
>>>> and
>>>> > didn't do it. It doesn't matter if its an individual, a government
>>>> > officer or a policeman.
>>>> > Are laws different in your country and in the USA?
>>>>
>>>>  Don't know about the US, but in germany police in nearly never made
>>>> responsible for whatever they do. We had even our parties server raided
>>>> a couple of days before an election without any consequences...
>>>>
>>>> > MU was not a "criminal company" *until* Virginia State authorities
>>>> told
>>>> > the Feds to seize it.
>>>>
>>>>  Of course they were, otherwise the hadn't been raided. (A judge or a
>>>> jury still might decide something different)
>>>>
>>>> > People could hire their services until that moment
>>>> > as they could do with any other company in the net. Financial
>>>> services,
>>>> > ISP's and even US tax authorities were operating normally with MU. Are
>>>> > they also criminals?.
>>>>
>>>>  What for was Al Capone sent to Alcatraz? Murder or not paying his
>>>> taxes?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >> Well, that's your point of view. I don't think the Feds or Virginia
>>>> >> State are responsible to keep MU running. And if the court determines
>>>> >> the raid was illegal, they gonna have to pay a pretty huge amount of
>>>> >> money to Kim and his fellows.
>>>> >
>>>> > First was a matter of money, now of who has to run the service, what
>>>> > next? :)
>>>>
>>>>  Finally it's the matter of reason. If the law in the US does not force
>>>> the Feds to keep a service online they were told to shut down, why
>>>> should they do so?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>  ____________________________________________________
>>>> 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 Talkpp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.nethttp://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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> 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/20120129/9aca02df/attachment.html>