<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Reinier Bakels wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div><font color="#0000ff">There was black and blue, and I added
red. If you (or your eyes) get upset because of a third color (or
actually a second, other than black), I really wonder what is going on.</font><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
What is going on is that it difficults mails being read.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div><font color="#0000ff">It is not 100% sure that your
interpretation is right and the others are wrong ...</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Guess you may say that about some issues from some pirate parties.
Anyway, as long as those issues belong to those pirate parties goals,
they (we) will continue defending those issues.<br>
<br>
And aren't you sure about other non-pirate parties being wrong about,
i.e., author's rights? I think you should name examples of political
parties defending reasonable goals on these topics, besides pirate
parties.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div><font color="#0000ff">politics does not always follows the
lines of logic</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
I guess if it follows the lines of logic, pirate parties would may not
be needed, as maybe all the currently existing threats wouldn't exist.
But I'm afraid that belongs to a parallel dimension; in this one we
have lots of work to do.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div><font color="#0000ff">. My estimate is that there is a
substantial risk that the human rights argument is used to strengthen
both the contents and the enforcement of "intellectual propeerty",
i,.e, to achieve exactly the opposite from PP objectives. This is based
on my perception on the way the human rights argument is used <em>today</em>
in this context.</font><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
As I said, that actually happens without pirate parties in scene; thus,
I think we shouldn't avoid using human rights, because the risk you
talk about is not a risk, but a real harm -as I say, existing prior to
our existence-.<br>
<br>
As they abuse the interpretation of human rights for liberticidal
purpose, of course I think we have to take human rights as reference,
mainly, to avoid such rights being threatened and damaged.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div>They can say whatever they want; they can say <i>we are
massaging you</i> while they beat you, or <i>we are supporting human
rights</i> while violating them -they did in Spain with the
implementation of 2000/31/EC, allowing censorship without prior court
ruling (against Spanish Constitution)-. Our duty is to prove they lie;
it is part of our opposition tasks.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><font color="#0000ff">Again, the substance of human rights
considerations in this context is by no means unambiguous. They will
juxtapose their "truth" with your "truth". In my view, in such a
situation it is easier to defend rights directly than to follow the
risky detour via human rights.</font><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
There are not infinite truths concerning human rights; while usually
there is a interpretation margin, specially when there exist
constitutional case law, if the constitutional wording has not changed,
whoever who interpretes now the opposite of what was interpreted 25
years ago on the same constitutional paragraph would deliberately lie.
Because that margin is limited.<br>
<br>
If one wants to get a different result from a certain constitutional
paragraph, I think that the right approach would be changing its
wording, and not cheating with its interpretation. We, as current
political opposition, must in my viewpoint unveil cheaters.<br>
<font color="#0000ff"></font>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div><font color="#0000ff">It is good to be ambitious. But it is
usually helpful to set priorities. Of course your energy (or the energy
of whoever other PP parliament member) is infinite. But you should also
take the "processing power" of the outside world in consideration.
Doing too much may confuse your voters.</font><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Usually, MPs -at least in Spain- make too few. So don't be so worried
about our energies if we are willing to work harder than that.<br>
<br>
About potential voters <i>processing power</i>, we have the certainty
on they would chastise us, if we opt to save our energies, because of
not working hard enough -if we follow your <i>energy saving</i>
attitude-; actually, we have been warned in this sense, just in case we
nail some seats in any parliament; thus, the <i>energy saving</i>
attitude is not in our mood.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"><font
color="#000000"><font color="#0000ff">Again, priorities, in
conjunction with long-term visions, are helpful. Note however that you
will be faced by people saying: <b>if you try to change TRIPS (in a
direction of less protection), then you are simply naive ...</b> and
then you better be prepared to answer that question, because it is a
pretty logical question. <br>
</font></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
It's not about being naive, but about being against current state of
things and, thus, being willing to change it. The strength available to
make it depends on the eligible voters support.<br>
<br>
I know that with just 1-2 MPs it's not feasible to make it; however,
those 1-2 MPs -in spite of your rejection- would attempt to make it
because <b>it's their duty, they were elected to make it or, at least,
to attempt it</b>. We're not going to abandon our duties just because
of not being feasible in the short term.<br>
<br>
As I said, we are not naive, but aware about our commitment with our
platforms. As long as you value such commitment; I mean, Spanish
Congress has 350 seats; if Government party holds more than 175, it has
absolute majority and doesn't need small parties, i.e., probably most,
even all PIRATA goals would become unfeasible during that concrete
term. What would you recommend us, Reinier? Not to attend plenary
sessions? Not to do anything as anything would be feasible? Not a
chance: we would make our job anyway.<font color="#000000"></font><br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C937666C0541404E98699CA4DD230195@RBB2008"
type="cite">
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div>I did: reducing term & scope of commercial rights,
allowing non commercial filesharing, etc; and that's concerning
author's rights ... as we saw last summer <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto_parties_at_a_glance">there
are other core issues for pirate parties</a>, Reinier; you're not going
to take such issues away from our platforms.<br>
<br>
<font color="#0000ff">Oh no, I did not mean to say that the list
was exhaustive, and I wasserious when I invited you to add more items.</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
And I was serious reintroducing the reduction of commercial rights term
& scope -that you left out just because you don't find it
feasible-, the rest of author's rights related issues, and the rest of
core issues.<br>
<br>
<br>
Carlos Ayala<br>
( Aiarakoa )<br>
<br>
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman<br>
</body>
</html>