<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>----- Mensaje original ----</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>De: Reinier Bakels <r.bakels@planet.nl><BR>Enviado: miércoles, 23 de abril, 2008 23:52:28</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> For a proper understnding (and political response) a sharp distinction must be made:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2>> </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2>> <FONT color=#000000>1. Property rights ONCE LEGALLY ASSIGNED should not be taken away from people by the government without a </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>> careful procedure and only with a careful disappropriation procedure. This is the true human right. By now, it is </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>> fairly obvious, but it has not always been. In Europe it is the result of the French Revolution. In China, its was </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>> established only a few years ago. BTW this aspect of property also helps authors to refrain from commercial </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>> exploitation (copyleft!). If a government decides by default assumption that all authors want to be financially </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>> compensated, e.g. by a levy, they actually violate this human right!</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>I will merely forward you to our most recent PPI document -about levies consultation-, concretely <EM><A href="http://int.piratenpartei.de/Levies_Questionnaire#The_premise_of_copyright_levies"><STRONG>The premise of copyright levies</STRONG></A></EM> section. If you read it carefully, you'll find out that:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>- opposing the <EM>intellectual property</EM> -even using that term provokes me some kind of allergy :)- is not opposing private property -in fact, as greatest private property supporters usually explain (we put Kinsella as a mere example), intellectual property does not exist, cultural works (as long as not meeting scarcity principle) shouldn't be treated as private properties; simply, their authors hold some rights (moral and material) on those works-; why, then, using China as an example?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>- if you take end-of-XVIII revolutions as examples, then also take Thomas Jefferson's words to check how did parents of USA consider ideas, innovation, etc</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>- sticking at XIXth century concepts and ideas -Berne Convention-, instead of using <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking">critical thinking</A>, seems not recommendable to me; I would even dare to extend this belief to most of PPI members, as long as all those pirate parties signed the reply to EC Levies Questionnaire supporting the idea of cultural works not being <EM>intellectual property</EM>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Only if we agree about not considering cultural works as private property; and only if we don't forget that we stick to UDHR -i.e., acknowledging authorship, material interests (which shouldn't be equalled to private property rights because of the above mentioned), etc-; then would we be able to understand that if current author's rights configuration is found to be excessive -in terms of UDHR itself, article 30: any right not to be interpreted as enabling to harm other rights-, redefining author's rights is not a disappropriation/expropriation procedure. First of all because you cannot expropriate what is not a property -would result ridiculous being myself called communist, when as I said before highest private property supporters deny cultural works being private property-; and finally because rule of law observancy is mandatory
... not only it is in the author's rights redefinition, but also it had to be between 1948 and 1967 when UN created <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIPO">WIPO</A> from the remains of <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_International_Bureaux_for_the_Protection_of_Intellectual_Property">BIRPI</A> -in my opinion, trying to equal the UDHR "<EM>moral and material interests</EM>" formula, to the pre-UDHR <EM>intellectual property</EM> fallacy-.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> 2. The risk however is that one will interpret this provision in the sense that any information is entitled an exclusive </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> right ( "intellectual property right"). This is what PP should oppose against. Traditionally lawyers agree that </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> freedom </FONT><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>of information is the rule, and exclusive rights are the exception, if and when established explicitly by law: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> copyright, patents, trademark law, etc. There is a tendency however to accept an alleged need for unwritten </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2>> intellectual property rights, such as know how, e.g. because it is an important asset for firms.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>> </FONT><FONT face="verdana, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>But an interpretation of the Lisbon treaty in this sense is wrong, <U>if not outright dishonest</U></STRONG>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2><EM>Thank you very much</EM> for being considered <EM>outright dishonest</EM>. Seems like some words, sometimes, were too lightly chosen.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Actually, the <EM>left aside</EM> European Constitution -reduced and dubbed as Lisboa Treaty-, when encouraging defence of <EM>intellectual property</EM>, does not defend private property, nor individual authors' rights -in Spain, France and other countries, small formal rightholders have no actual voice about their works, but RMOs and big companies-, but all those firms, <EM><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Four_%28companies%29">Big Four</A></EM> stuff, RMOs and other lobbies interests. We are talking about privileges, we are talking about unbalanced and unequitative justice system, we are talking about few's rights over many's rights ... we are talking about <EM>might vs right</EM>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>And when might and not right is on the table, who are the mightest ones? Usually not the righteous ones.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2>You have some examples on <EM>press clipping</EM> and reduction of quotation rights to see by yourself how the interpretation of Lisboa Treaty that you think would be wrong is actually right, unfortunately more right than ever. Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2> Carlos Ayala</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2> ( Aiarakoa )</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Verdana size=2> Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman</FONT></DIV></DIV></div><br>
<hr size=1><br><font face="Verdana" size="-2"><a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailuk/taglines/isp/control/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=52433/*http://green.yahoo.com/es/dia-de-la-tierra/">Yahoo! Solidario.</a><br>Intercambia los objetos que ya no necesitas y ayuda a mantener un entorno más ecológico.<br></font></body></html>