[pp.int.general] Global Dictatorship: Intellectual Property Denaturation or Why a Pirate Party in the Third World?

[David van Deijk]

Richard Stallman schreef op 26.02.2013 13:56:

>
> Many Pirate parties' platforms (perhaps all) treat copyright and
> patent as separate issues.  That is the right thing to do.  However,
> using one term to refer to both of those laws (and a bunch of other
> laws, too) works against clear thinking.

A better example to cite would be the treatment of trademarks
and brandnames compared to how the pirateparty views copyright or
patents. The pirateparty isn't enthusiastic about either of those
latter two. So about preventing confusion it is better to cite
that example.

>
> Have you read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html?
> It explains these two issues -- the bias and the confusion.
I have read it a long time ago.
The pirateparty can not ignore what is being said about "IP".
We can only try to redefine it. It is more effective if we make
clear that the different parts commonly assumed to fall under
the false umbrella term "IP" are to be treated differently,
like trademarks _are_ different from copyright, than trying
to argue the choice of words those people made is wrong.
Actions are more important than words here.

the WIPO is an organization we as pirateparties have to deal with
sooner or later. We can either negotiate about policy or we can
start talking about the name they have chosen. I think most
pirates agree with me the policy debate takes priority.

you are welcome off course to disagree and repudiate where
necessary.

I try to stay away from the term by replacing it with either
"copyright(law)" or "patents(law)" where appropriate, yet
sometimes it needs to be directly addressed. In those cases
I use the other terms I mentioned before.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,
David van Deijk.
Kandidaat Tweede Kamer 2012,
Ledenraadslid 2013-
Piratenpartij Nederland
David.van.Deijk at piratenpartij.nl