<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<STYLE type=text/css>DIV {
MARGIN: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16640" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>I don't think we really
disagree.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>I fully acknowledge that
"intellectual property" is a misnomer. So did the great legal scholar Josef
Kohler a century ago when he proposed the term "immaterial goods" instead. There
is a famous paper by Machlup & Penrose from 1950 about patents where they
explain that clever interest groups in the 19th century abused the ideas of the
French revolution and propagated a false similarity between real and
intellectual property.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>The ECHR and GG provisions
I refer to have a different meaning, and I think the Lisbon treaty provision
should be interpreted in the same way. Once someone owns e.g. a copyright, it
can not be taken away by the goverment at will. Things than can be put on the
balance sheet can not be disappropriated by the state at will.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>Re "dishonest": this is
about the idea of unwritten intellectual property rights. This is the kind
of extension that is advocated by people who make the wrong interpretation
of the Lisbon Treaty provision. PP should strongly oppose against that.
Another example (next to "know how") are domain names. Some people argue that a
domain name should be protected by a property right (there you go again) by
itself. I would argue that the exsisting legal systems, notably trade marks,
trade names and copyright should suffice and anything beyond that should ne
rejected. Protection for generic names (e.g. business.com) is preposterous. The
alleged need in society can never be an argument. Occasionally I have the desire
to beat people if I am very irritated. Still it is not allowed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>In sum, imho there is
nothing against protecting property, as long as the fundamental difference
between property and "intellectual property" (I always put it in quotation
marks) is acknowledged. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff
size=2>reinier </FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Groeten, Grüße, Regards, Cordialement, Hälsningar, Ciao, Saygilar,
Üdvözlettel, Pozdrowienia, Kumusta, Adios, Oan't sjen, Ave, Doei, Yassou,
Yoroshiku<BR>>>> REINIER B. BAKELS <BR>private: Johan Willem
Frisostraat 149, 2713 CC Zoetermeer, The Netherlands telephone: +31 79 316 3126,
GSM ("Handy") +31 6 4988 6490, fax +31 79 316 7221</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=aiarakoa@yahoo.es href="mailto:aiarakoa@yahoo.es">Carlos Ayala</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net
href="mailto:pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net">Pirate Parties
International -- General Talk</A> ; <A title=internacional@partidopirata.es
href="mailto:internacional@partidopirata.es">internacional@partidopirata.es</A>
; <A title=rrpp@partidopirata.es
href="mailto:rrpp@partidopirata.es">rrpp@partidopirata.es</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 24, 2008 1:14
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [pp.int.general] Lissabon
Treaty: very bad news</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif">
<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
<<A href="mailto:r.bakels@planet.nl">r.bakels@planet.nl</A>><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>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>____________________________________________________<BR>Pirate Parties
International - General
Talk<BR>pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net<BR>http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>