[pp.int.general] eagerly awaiting response to PPNL questions
Josef Ohlsson Collentine
international at piratpartiet.se
Wed Mar 18 12:29:00 CET 2015
Thanks ppnl for some very clear and interesting questions that should
clarify a lot of issues once answered. Looking forward to see the reasoning
from the board on this.
/josef
On Mar 18, 2015 12:04 PM, <
pp.international.general-request at lists.pirateweb.net> wrote:
Send pp.international.general mailing list submissions to
pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
pp.international.general-request at lists.pirateweb.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
pp.international.general-owner at lists.pirateweb.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of pp.international.general digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: What have you done in 2015 to support copyright reform?
(hyazinthe at emailn.de)
2. Questions to PPI Board from PPNL.
(internationaal at piratenpartij.nl)
3. Re: Questions to PPI Board from PPNL. (hyazinthe at emailn.de)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:02:38 +0100
From: <hyazinthe at emailn.de>
To: pp-leaders at lists.pp-international.net,
pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] What have you done in 2015 to support
copyright reform?
Message-ID: <64b2657f3551e01434ed4577d83cd310 at mail.emailn.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Today I wanted to call 3 MEPs via the recently released copyright
initiative of La Quadrature du Net:
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/urgent-the-positive-reform-of-copyright-is-being-pirated-in-the-european-parliament
Experiences:
La Quadrature provides a fantastic service with this website; it even
enables you to call your MEPs for free.
At least in theory, because in my practice the line always was
reserved/used by someone else before me.
When I've encountered this situation, then I simply tried to call the MEP
regularly... at least in theory, because
in my practice, I've never ever got a direct conversation with an MEP by
this way, yet.
I always got to talk with their employees and practicants, so far.
For citizens that's really a shitty experience. But what shall we net
activists do ? Take what is there and live with it...
At first I tried to call Angelika Niebler (PPE, GERMANY); I've agreed with
her employee to send her an e-mail where I
tell her my view on the Reda report from my view as author and user.
Then I tried to call Axel VOSS ( PPE, GERMANY ) and told his employee, who
noted my input, that I'd really appreciate it,
if Mr. Voss would support the Reda report, because
architects are breaking copyright all the time in their daily work and
can't afford having another complexity layer on their
work by constantly considering that they can't simply put the nice pic
found via google search in their commercial architecture
presentation, and that they can't simply modify a font used in their
commercial architecture presentation, and need to find
2nd choice alternatives to all of such cases.
Additionally, I've told him that user's daily use of the web needs to be
legalized, because there's no valid reason to
not do so, considering that even in the most controversial case,
non-commercial filesharing of copyright protected works,
the study of the EU commission said, that it doesn't do harm; and because
in general the majority of studies in copyright research
are heading for the same direction if not even showing, that this usage is
conductive to business.
Thirdly I've tried to call Mr. Wieland (PPE, GERMANY) and agreed with his
employee that Mr. Wieland will call me back on
the topic, I want to talk with him.
My biggest fail so far is, that I have managed to bring an NGO to take my
input as their own statement and send it to
the MEPs, but I simply still don't gave them the input. I simply don't find
the time to do so !!! It's an ass full of work to
create a statement to the Reda Report from the scratch.
Particulaly, as additionally I'm getting engaged in the resurrection of our
successful copywrongs initiative by attending
the work meetings every wednesday on the mumble server "Young Pirates EU"
on 8 p.m. and doing stuff for the group there;
please also be at these meetings; it's not hard, simply enter mumble,
server "Young Pirates EU", at 8 p.m.
That was my wednesday noon, 17.03.15. I'd like to here reports of you, how
you currently are supporting copyright reform.
Greetings,
Torben Lechner
--- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
Von: <hyazinthe at emailn.de>
Datum: 23.02.2015 15:54:30
An: pp-leaders at lists.pp-international.net,
pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
Betreff: What have you done in 2015 to support copyright reform?
> Hi all actors reading this,
>
> what have you done in 2015 to support copyright reform in pirate interest?
>
>
> You know that our aim of a copyright reform making copyright socially
balanced
>
> and up-to-date is the big bang of the pirate movement; it's the reason why
> we
> are all here and the reason of all pirate structure. It's extremely
important,
> that
> we escort the copyright report of our pirate Julia Reda MEP as good as
possible
>
> through the parlamentary process.
>
> So, what have you done ?
>
> Have you already look up your country’s MEPs among the
> report’s shadow rapporteurs -
https://juliareda.eu/eu-copyright-evaluation/#shadows
> -
> in the Legal Affairs committee -
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/juri/members.html
> -
> (which is driving the report)
> and in the Internal Market -
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/imco/members.html
> -
> and Culture committees -
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/cult/members.html
> - (which are providing opinions)
> and picked up a phone (! far more effective than e-mail) and asked them to
> support the copyright report of Julia Reda ?
>
> Or, if you have little time and know how in copyright, have you already
told
> the aforementioned MEPs, that
> you've heard about the copyright report by the news and were surprised
that
> with this copyright report finally
> the EU seems to do politics in interest of the public, instead of against
> the public ?
>
> Have you already told them which additional reform proposals you’d like to
> see in it?
>
> Have you already called shadow rapporteur EFDD Laura Ferrara MEP (Italy)
> - https://juliareda.eu/2014/12/eu-copyright-evaluation/#shadows -
> who is the one shadow rapporteur of all shadow rapporteurs, who is most
likely
> interested in picking up concrete pirate demands,
> via phone (!) and suggest her to make an amendment to the copyright report
> of Julia Reda, which
> legalizes non-commercial copying and online distribution of copyright
protected
> works and
> reasoned with striking arguments like for instance that without this step
> copyright never will
> be accepted by the public or that the majority of copyright studies prompt
> this step, as the majority of
> copyright studies has shown, that non-commercial filesharing is not
harmful
> to business, but even
> conductive to business -
https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Studies_on_file_sharing
> ?
>
> Have you already - which would be especially effective - contact your
local
> digital rights organization, library association, remix artist or other
> party, which is interested in relaxing copyright, and ask them about their
> plan to support this fight for a copyright reform, which makes
> copyright socially balanced and up-to-date, and offer to help ?
>
> Have you already written a critic/statement about the copyright report, in
> which you concretely
> say that the report goes not far enough in making copyright more relaxed,
> and needs to
> contain abolishment of copyright levies, copyright term shortening on 25
> years after a copyright
> protected work got published, legalization of non-commercial filesharing,
> a revision of international
> treaties like the TRIPS agreement, in order to make copyright more
relaxed,
> and went with
> this statement to an appropriate NGO and offered them this statement for
> taking it and sending
> it as the NGO's statement to the aforementioned MEPs ?
>
> Have you already started discussion threads in external forums about the
> copyright reform
> process and asked the audience, to participate like sketched in the
aforementioned
> questions ?
>
>
> Finally I'd like to empathize, that this thread here is NOT meant to be
> for moaning about the copyright report of our pirate Julia Reda MEP, but
> for looking forward and getting
> active and making the best of the current situationn. So, if someone
starts
> going off-topic and moan,
> that the copyright report is not radical enough and too much of a
compromise,
> then please ignore it;
> let's keep everything constructive and practically useful.
>
>
> Greetings,
> Torben Lechner
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:14:27 +0100
From: internationaal at piratenpartij.nl
To: board at pp-international.net
Cc: pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
Subject: [pp.int.general] Questions to PPI Board from PPNL.
Message-ID: <ae5ffc2a2c556edcb58f68d9fb1afa91 at piratenpartij.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Prior to the upcoming online GA the Dutch Pirate Party has several
questions it would like answered.
Most of these can be answered succinctly in yes / no or a link to the
relevant pages, and it would be much preferred if they were answered
thus.
1) We would like to know how PP-DE's international co-ordinator annex
board member procured the motion to alternative medicine. Though
partially answered in the recent piratetimes article, we would like
these answered for clarity.
1.1) If this motion is part of PPDE's program and is explicitly
supported by PPDE (or an individual idea of PPDE international
coordinator.)
1.2) And if so, where we can find this in the program, and the
proceedings by which this position on alternative medicine was reached.
1.3) If not, why this motion is on the international agenda.
1.4) Lastly, why PPDE thinks such a subject should be internationally
upheld by pirate parties, as pirate parties can advocate information
politics perfectly well without, or even on a contradictory stance to
alternative medicine.
1.5) Bluntly put: Why does PPDE feel that with all the recent commotion
regarding its board members, that this policy subject has enough
priority that is must be taken care of on this online GA, while at the
same time there seems no time for discussing structural problems in ppi.
2) We have seen several board members bringing in complaints and grounds
for removal against one another. We would like clarified:
2.1) Which board members have been thus indicted.
2.2) And where the formal complaints are to be found.
2.3) As well as any ruling by the CoA on these matters.
3) The board has refused to accept PPAU's departure of PPI pending a
formal letter which PPAU has no intention of sending on grounds of
principle. Clarification is requested on:
3.1) If indeed this is the sole ground for refusing to acknowledge their
departure.
3.2) If not, what other grounds exist to contest this fait accompli.
3.3) What is accomplished by refusing their departure on this ground?
3.4) How the board sees this impasse resolved.
3.5) Most importantly, why is the format/style of the resignation the
primary concern instead of the fact ppau wants to leave?
4) We note that the Australian proposal for an online assembly have been
ignored in favour of a mumble meeting type of proceeding.
4.1) On what grounds were these RoP preferred?
5) It has come to our attention that the new bank account of PPI is
actually PP-LU's. We would like to have clarified:
5.1) If indeed this new account is on the name of PPLU.
5.2) And if it is PPI or PPLU who ultimately holds the keys.
5.3) If the previous PPI account is salvaged, or lost.
5.4) If PPI has a bank account on it's own name.
P.S. German board added in bcc with regards to question 1.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:52:22 +0100
From: <hyazinthe at emailn.de>
To: Pirate Parties International -- General Talk
<pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] Questions to PPI Board from PPNL.
Message-ID: <c409619ee0e7286f84177cb705516fba at mail.emailn.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I'm just a normal basic pirate party member in Germany, I'm not a board
member. The implications
of these questions look pretty obscure to me:
1. The PPDE promotes evidence based medicine and correspondingly
rather rejects homeopathy and such stuff, for which effect there is
no evidence.
2. Health politics is something, that we have, but which definitively
doesn't belong to our
core topics.
So, just with these both points said, the implications of your questions
look to me like
one, single individual in the process made personal agenda setting, which
is not in
consent with the pirate party Germany and would cause great internal
argument once
publicly presented; for instance in a big mumble round "oh, btw, people, in
the name of
you all I've made a stand for non-evidence based medicine on international
level; core topics FTW" >>> shit storm certain in 3, 2, 1...
I think it's important, that direct board members of the PPDE will have a
look at this...
have you really contacted the board with your questions ? So,
vorstand at piratenpartei.de ?
Greetings,
Torben Lechner
--- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
Von: internationaal at piratenpartij.nl
Datum: 17.03.2015 21:14:27
An: board at pp-international.net
Betreff: [pp.int.general] Questions to PPI Board from PPNL.
> Prior to the upcoming online GA the Dutch Pirate Party has several
> questions it would like answered.
> Most of these can be answered succinctly in yes / no or a link to the
> relevant pages, and it would be much preferred if they were answered
> thus.
>
> 1) We would like to know how PP-DE's international co-ordinator annex
> board member procured the motion to alternative medicine. Though
> partially answered in the recent piratetimes article, we would like
> these answered for clarity.
> 1.1) If this motion is part of PPDE's program and is explicitly
> supported by PPDE (or an individual idea of PPDE international
> coordinator.)
> 1.2) And if so, where we can find this in the program, and the
> proceedings by which this position on alternative medicine was reached.
> 1.3) If not, why this motion is on the international agenda.
> 1.4) Lastly, why PPDE thinks such a subject should be internationally
> upheld by pirate parties, as pirate parties can advocate information
> politics perfectly well without, or even on a contradictory stance to
> alternative medicine.
> 1.5) Bluntly put: Why does PPDE feel that with all the recent commotion
>
> regarding its board members, that this policy subject has enough
> priority that is must be taken care of on this online GA, while at the
> same time there seems no time for discussing structural problems in ppi.
>
>
> 2) We have seen several board members bringing in complaints and grounds
>
> for removal against one another. We would like clarified:
> 2.1) Which board members have been thus indicted.
> 2.2) And where the formal complaints are to be found.
> 2.3) As well as any ruling by the CoA on these matters.
>
> 3) The board has refused to accept PPAU's departure of PPI pending a
> formal letter which PPAU has no intention of sending on grounds of
> principle. Clarification is requested on:
> 3.1) If indeed this is the sole ground for refusing to acknowledge their
>
> departure.
> 3.2) If not, what other grounds exist to contest this fait accompli.
> 3.3) What is accomplished by refusing their departure on this ground?
> 3.4) How the board sees this impasse resolved.
> 3.5) Most importantly, why is the format/style of the resignation the
> primary concern instead of the fact ppau wants to leave?
>
> 4) We note that the Australian proposal for an online assembly have been
>
> ignored in favour of a mumble meeting type of proceeding.
> 4.1) On what grounds were these RoP preferred?
>
> 5) It has come to our attention that the new bank account of PPI is
> actually PP-LU's. We would like to have clarified:
> 5.1) If indeed this new account is on the name of PPLU.
> 5.2) And if it is PPI or PPLU who ultimately holds the keys.
> 5.3) If the previous PPI account is salvaged, or lost.
> 5.4) If PPI has a bank account on it's own name.
>
> P.S. German board added in bcc with regards to question 1.
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
pp.international.general mailing list
pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
End of pp.international.general Digest, Vol 97, Issue 29
********************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20150318/7bdc4b32/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the pp.international.general
mailing list