Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pirate Party Coming To Canada

timothy posted about 5 years ago | from the but-the-vikings-hit-canada-hundreds-of-years-ago dept.

Media 394

An anonymous reader writes "After scoring a surprise electoral win in Sweden and getting high-profile support in Germany, The Pirate Party is coming to Canada. The party's goals are fairly simple. People should have the right to share and copy music, movies and virtually any material, as long as it is for personal use, not for profit. It opposes government and corporate monitoring of Internet activities, unless as part of a criminal investigation. It also wants to phase out patents."

cancel ×

394 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Vote (4, Insightful)

scream at the sky (989144) | about 5 years ago | (#28585255)

I'm a DAMN proud Canadian right now

Re:First Vote (0, Troll)

professional_troll (1178701) | about 5 years ago | (#28585365)

Because you love being a theif you stealing cunt!

Re:First Vote (4, Insightful)

SausageOfDoom (930370) | about 5 years ago | (#28585777)

I know you're a troll and all, but I actually agree with your point (though not how you made it).

There's a fine line between fair and unfair use. If I like a film, money should go to the people involved in creating it and bringing it to my screen. If I like music, money should go to the people involved in creating it and bringing it to my speakers.

Sharing for non-commercial gain was fine back in the days of copying tapes for your friends at school. A group of you could club together, buy a tape each, and share them between you to get a good collection. Sure, the content creators might not get all the money they wanted, but they'd get all your pocket money. And all the pocket money from similar groups of kids all around the country.

But things have changed with the internet. Now only one person in one country has to buy it, and suddenly the group size changes from a handful of close friends into an anonymous P2P network millions strong. No industry could survive something like that - and I'm not just talking about the RIAA et all who would no longer be able to rape producers and consumers alike, I'm talking about there not being enough money around to invest in creating quality content for us in the first place.

It's all very well saying that if the content is good people will go out and buy it anyway - but once you make it legal, mainstream hardware manufacturers will come along with P2P-enabled set-top boxes which will bring convenience to the mass market, and there will be no reason for anyone to go out and buy any content. It would destroy the content creators overnight, and then we'd get no quality content.

Don't get me wrong - I agree that recent court cases and fines have gone too far, and totally disagree with things like the three-strike law. The industry is used to having it their own way for too long, and they have to realise that their days of bleeding the customer dry are numbered. Piracy and P2P are here, and no matter what they try, it's not going anywhere. They should be adopting their business models to take full use of technology, and provide affordable, legal and practical methods of content delivery. No DRM, no ridiculous fines for piracy; instead of us vs them, they should be working with us to say "if you like something, pay for it - it's only fair".

But behind all of this, there must be a legal framework to say what's right and what's wrong. Something that says "if you like something, pay for it - it's only fair".

Re:First Vote (4, Informative)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 5 years ago | (#28585523)

You mean, since they are the first on the north american continent? Oh wait...! [wikipedia.org]

-- Proud voter of the Pirate Party in the EU election 2009!

Bumper stickers? (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 5 years ago | (#28585527)

Where do I get a bumper sticker? There's no sign that the Pirates are coming to the US, but I can show my support and make a political statement anyway. How about a flag? I'll run it up right below the US flag, and above the Arkansas flag. THAT will make people wonder!!

Pirate party??? (2, Funny)

naz404 (1282810) | about 5 years ago | (#28585731)

I'm still waiting for the Ninja Party!

Re:Pirate party??? (5, Funny)

KingMotley (944240) | about 5 years ago | (#28585839)

The ninja party has always been around, you just can't see it.

Proportional Representation (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585261)

If we had proportional representation then the pirate party(and other minority parties) would have a chance at being represented in the house.

Instead we have rep-by-pop, which will be the status quo as long as the Conservative Party and Liberal Party continue to rule.

This is CRAP!!!! (1)

SerpentMage (13390) | about 5 years ago | (#28585349)

The fault of having rep-by-pop is not the fault of the parties. After all look at what happened in BC. You can blame the complexities or what have you, but the populace has clearly said, "NO!" As such it is what it is and will stay and what it is. Remember that, this is the second time they tried that vote in BC.

Personally I am completely disappointed in this result since I would prefer something closer to proportional representation since I happen to be part of a smaller party (Libertarian). But democracy is what it is...

Re:This is CRAP!!!! (1)

V50 (248015) | about 5 years ago | (#28585393)

Yup. I used to be a big supporter of electoral reform, even as a Tory, (I favored MMP). While I still wish to see the system change, I don't want to ram it down anyone's throat, I feel the referendums, while disappointing, pretty much settled the matter for quite some time.

Re:This is CRAP!!!! (2, Interesting)

Insanity Defense (1232008) | about 5 years ago | (#28585491)

With proportional representation the party leaders choose who represent you and you have no way to say no to a scummy person. Also independents effectively cannot be elected.

I would prefer larger electoral districts where anyone with at least 10% of the vote becomes a representative of the district and gets 1 vote per 1 full percent of the vote he received. As to pay the representative would get a percentage of the pay for that districts representatives that equals the % of the vote received. This allows the minority to be represented without handing more power to party leaderships and their cronies.

Re:This is CRAP!!!! (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | about 5 years ago | (#28585579)

With proportional representation the party leaders choose who represent you and you have no way to say no to a scummy person.

Not necessarily. For example, the Bavarian communal elections have a representational system where you can vote for single people as well as a list. That way you can explicitly vote for people even at the very end of the list, who wouldn't have had a chance to get in otherwise.

Also independents effectively cannot be elected.

Independents can make up their own list.

Re:This is CRAP!!!! (3, Insightful)

kvezach (1199717) | about 5 years ago | (#28585753)

With proportional representation the party leaders choose who represent you and you have no way to say no to a scummy person. Also independents effectively cannot be elected.

For STV (like BC-STV, the BC method that was unfortunately defeated), that's absolutely not true. A voter can rank the candidates in his desired order. If a party fields a scummy person, you could choose to just not rank that person (effectively ranking him last), and if enough voters do that, then that person won't be elected, no matter the wishes of the party. The same thing goes for independents: they can run as independents, and voters may rank an independent like any other candidate.

Re:This is CRAP!!!! (2, Insightful)

wisty (1335733) | about 5 years ago | (#28585845)

Also, rep by pop is not entirely immune to scummy party hacks.

Re:Proportional Representation (4, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | about 5 years ago | (#28585773)

Um, no we don't. We have a centrist party and a fascist party. With the centrist party representing liberals by default. Believe me a conservative party and liberal party would be a serious step in the right direction.

Everyone (1, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | about 5 years ago | (#28585289)

If everyone can get a copy of a movie as soon as it's released in Russia and share it for other people to download, won't that negatively affect attendance in cinemas and DVD sales in other regions?

Re:Everyone (4, Insightful)

hansraj (458504) | about 5 years ago | (#28585323)

Most of the time when I go to the cinema it is not because I can't wait to get to watch the movie for free but because I enjoy watching it on a big screen.

Re:Everyone (4, Insightful)

Korin43 (881732) | about 5 years ago | (#28585409)

Conversely, I'm entirely willing to pay to watch a movie, but I hate movie theaters.

Re:Everyone (1)

damnfuct (861910) | about 5 years ago | (#28585489)

Definitely; you can't just expect people to shell out for an experience they can get repeatedly from a wal-mart home theatre. The one benefit I have seen from piracy is that the movie theatre has stepped up the picture, sound, and presentation of movies. As far as I am concerned, it's about time; these sellers were stagnating progress because people had no other choice. It's now becoming easier to justify going to a theatre, and I'm glad for this.

Re:Everyone (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 5 years ago | (#28585555)

So? It will not be forbidden to pay someone money for the service of offering a huge screen, THX sound ready-made popcorn, and all that. (Ok, I hope the popcorn prices will be more reasonable.)

Me, of course, I watch many movies on my home cinema system (beamer + 5.1 sound) that I bought before I basically became broke, because I can't afford cinema anymore nowadays.
But I do absolutely love the big bass and full sound of THX cinemas, and think the money is well worth it, if I got it. (Although nothing beats 300 in an 3D IMAX cinema with THX! [look out for the analog film ones. They have a much higher resolution for non-CGI movies.])

Re:Everyone (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 5 years ago | (#28585557)

No. Going to a theater, or "going out" for anything, is a social event. Private entertainment, in your home, has little to do with social events.

Besides - people who really like theaters will go back and watch the same movie repeatedly. My wife does that.

Myself - if I've seen a movie once, I very rarely want to see it again. Unlike reading, where I might read the same boot two, three, or rarely even more times.

One Wallet (5, Insightful)

castrox (630511) | about 5 years ago | (#28585341)

Your question is interesting and one which many people ask themselves. I think it's more like people have one wallet to use and instead of spending money on music they kind of like they spend it on other things - just because they can get it by downloading. The total economic output is however more or less constant. I can only refer to my own spending statistics so feel free to contradict me. I don't put that same money in my savings account! I use it to go to the movies (5 of them past 6 months), fuel my car, go on vacation.

So the recent legislations in e.g. Sweden and the rest of Europe has nothing to do with economics, but rather only distribution of money and "fairness" to the companies. Of course, to succeed they must squash many citizen rights and deploy surveillance to keep citizens in check. One could argue that the win from such legislation really is nothing in comparison of how trampled the citizens become. Of course, the new legislation opens up a can of worms to further reduction of rights sort of like Pandora's box. We end up moving in the wrong direction if what we want is democracy. //S

Re:One Wallet (3, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585383)

Actually, the effects on your local, domestic industries and services will most likely be negative.

As you pointed out, people only have so much money. When you only have 100 bucks (and banks clinging to money like never before, so overspending isn't really an option anymore) you can only spend 100 bucks. People will not get "and", they get "or". CD or haircut. DVD or dinner.

Now, which of the two will keep more money in your country? A haircut from a local shop with local people working there or a CD from a US rapper? A dinner at a local restaurant eating local food or a bollywood DVD?

(not trying to be nationalist here, but it usually makes the right wing proponents of stricter copyright laws shut up when they can't really argue against it without pissing off their "$country first!" voters) :)

Re:One Wallet (2, Informative)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 5 years ago | (#28585563)

That argument only applies for countries which don't produce any copyrighted works of their own, or do so in trivial quantities relative to external markets. That isn't true for any of the countries where the pirate party is popping up.

Re:One Wallet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585715)

It applies to any country with an "IP" trade deficit, that is, pretty well any country apart from the US. Ignoring IP might mean local IP pushers miss out on some money from exports, but it also means an even larger quantity of money doesn't go off-shore, delivering a net benefit to the nation.

Re:One Wallet (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585739)

Sweden has a large content industry? I know the rumors about Swedish porn, are they really true?

Aside of this, you're of course right, it does apply to countries that dominantly import instead of export content.

Re:One Wallet (1)

Razalhague (1497249) | about 5 years ago | (#28585779)

Most of the money goes to multinational corporations, not the people making the copyrighted material.

Re:One Wallet (1)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | about 5 years ago | (#28585575)

But that doesn't take into account the local movie/music shop owner that could be selling you the CD/DVD.

Re:One Wallet (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585733)

How much, relative to the amount spent, is going to stay domestic and how much goes abroad? When I get my hair cut, all of it stays here. The shop owner pays his taxes here, the employee pays his taxes here and both spend most of their income here. With CDs, at the very least a large portion of the revenue goes abroad to the license holder.

Re:Everyone (3, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585355)

Probably not.

I can already get a movie as soon as it's out in cinemas. You may rest assured as soon as it's released somewhere on this planet, a torrent is created shortly afterwards. That's already how it's done. Do you think "allowing" this to exist in a country would change it one little bit? How can you spread it earlier than at the same time you get to see it at all?

Yet, people still go to the movies and they still buy DVDs. Why? Simple. I don't have a THX system at home and neither do I have a huge screen. And certainly no 3D machine. If the movie is good enough, I wanna see it like that! But is it worth the 10 bucks or more? I'm not gonna waste 10 bucks and 2-3 hours of my life on a movie when I don't know if it's worth it. 9 out of 10 times it's not. And, being a statistician, at that odds I'm on average better off if I don't go.

Re:Everyone (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about 5 years ago | (#28585597)

Actually, while this may astound you, the vast majority of people are fundamentally honest, and relatively unlikely to break the law. This doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of people who still do, especially when it comes to file-copying (it's not sharing; when you share you give up something). However, once the law says that it's fine to go out and upload or download to your heart's content, people will. And there's very, very little chance that they will then choose to buy a CD or DVD. They might go to a live show or catch a theatre viewing, but with hard disks as big as they've gotten these days and every computer having a DVD burner anyhow, there's just no reason for the average person to do anything other than download it free.

Also, if 9/10 movies that you see aren't worth it, you're either an idiot (do a little research first) or have serious pattern recognition issues. If you meant that 9/10 of all movies are crap and that's why you don't see movies in the theatre, then you're just an idiot *and* a crappy statistician; by that "logic" you would have be fine having unprotected sex with anybody you want and would never get tested for HIV, since the vast majority (far in excess of 90%) of the world's population don't have it, so why bother? It's a waste of your time right? Judging everything based on the total population, without considering conditional probability, seems like a really bad idea to me, but then, I'm not a statistician; so what do I know? In my experience, most movies that I watch a 2-minute preview of and spend 5 minutes reading reviews or talking to friends, think "this looks good", and go to... well, they're worth it. Max 10 minutes of my time to decide, all completely without downloading some Chinese guy's subtitled movie theatre showing videoed using a smuggled camcorder.

Re:Everyone (2, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585727)

They sure are honest. The problem with copyright here is that it's a "don't know, don't care, don't understand" law. Most don't know it's illegal to engage in filesharing, despite all the propagan... I mean information. They've been copying since 8track was in style, why is it suddenly no longer ok? They don't care because they see it as a victimless crime. There's nothing "stolen". Nobody lost anything. I've had people ask me for a copy of programs or for unlocks for their consoles who would never break the law intentionally (I work for a company that houses also the local version of the RIAA/MPAA and people working there asked for copies... go figure), and likewise they were kinda pissed and thought I was just lazy or trying to find excuses when I refused. For most, copying is a bit like speeding on the freeway, everyone does it and nobody gets hurt. And the "don't understand" part is easy to see when you look at the confusing way most copyright laws are written. Hell, I practically exist on copyright, a good deal of my job hangs on it, and I don't understand half of it without a lenghty chat with our legal department. If whatever you want to do with the content you paid for is most likely not legal anyway (unless you do this, but not if you do that, though if you do this before...), why bother trying?

And yes, 9 out of 10 movies that make it to the cinema ain't what I'd call good entertainment. Fortunately I'm blessed with people who do go to the movies and tell me whether it's worth it or not. 9 out of 10 times, I didn't miss much.

As for your HIV comparison: I hope you can see the difference between missing a good movie and getting infected. If you can't, please inform me beforehand in case we ever end up in the same bed.

Re:Everyone (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about 5 years ago | (#28585521)

If everyone can get a copy of a movie as soon as it's released in Russia and share it for other people to download, won't that negatively affect attendance in cinemas and DVD sales in other regions?

I remember Episode I being downloadable like a week after the movie came out, so it's not like what you're describing is a new thing. So far they have not actually proven a loss as a direct result of it.

Re:Everyone (2, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 5 years ago | (#28585531)

If everyone can get a copy of a movie as soon as it's released in Russia and share it for other people to download, won't that negatively affect attendance in cinemas and DVD sales in other regions?

It won't, because original English movies are not shown in Russia; they're always dubbed, because so few people understand spoken English well enough.

As for the general point; well, the obvious "fix" on behalf of movie makers would be to release movies at the same time in all markets, no?

Re:Everyone (1)

rohan972 (880586) | about 5 years ago | (#28585669)

If everyone can get a copy of a movie as soon as it's released in Russia and share it for other people to download, won't that negatively affect attendance in cinemas and DVD sales in other regions?

Yes, or rather, probably. Potentially, the portions of the entertainment industry that rely on sales of infinitely copyable information may wither and die. However that pales into insignificance when you consider the issues of how copyright is affecting education, for example. Compulsory schools using copyrighted texts for material that is already in the public domain, such as school level mathematics, amounts to an education tax.

Screw the movie industry, give me an educated population without draining the economy. I've recently begun buying out of copyright textbooks. Composition & Rhetoric, Arithmetic, Algebra and a few other topics so far. Basic mathematics doesn't change, so will be online soon, along with anything else I find that is still educationally relevant.

Sick (4, Funny)

iamdrscience (541136) | about 5 years ago | (#28585291)

I for one am sick of these neo-pirates perverting the time-tested ideals of classical piratism. Copyright and patent reform? What happened to grog, wenches and plunder? For shame on these people, ruining the good name of pirates.

Re:Sick (4, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | about 5 years ago | (#28585333)

Shhhh, you have to start with the popular stuff, then you can slowly slip in your other agendas.

Re:Sick (4, Funny)

iamdrscience (541136) | about 5 years ago | (#28585429)

Since when does "the popular stuff" not include booze, women and free stuff? If those are unpopular, then I guess I'm doomed to a life of being utterly uncool. Don't feel sorry for me though, I'm sure I'll survive somehow...

Re:Sick (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 5 years ago | (#28585633)

What? Grog, wenches and plunder are the most popular things ever amongst pirates!

Yarrrrr! *raises the saber and runs for the enemies*

Re:Sick (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 5 years ago | (#28585421)

What happened to grog, wenches and plunder?

It's been replaced with "Rum, Sodomy and the Lash."

"Arrrgg, matie, thirty days at sea, and not a wench to be seen."

"Grease up the monkey."

Re:Sick (5, Funny)

Anonymous Cowled (917825) | about 5 years ago | (#28585441)

Arrr.... it's not gay if it happens on a boat.

Re:Sick (0, Offtopic)

rolfwind (528248) | about 5 years ago | (#28585459)

I for one am sick of these neo-pirates perverting the time-tested ideals of classical piratism. Copyright and patent reform?

I don't know if phasing out patents is actually "reform". If I have my history correct, patents were actually to open information up and get rid of secretive guilds. In exchange for opening info up, the government grants a limited-time monopoly on it's application to the inventor/discoverer.

I think nontrivial inventions (like Apple's implementation of multitouch, which itself was made by 2 University of Delaware Professors who started the Fingerworks company which was bought by Apple) deserve protection and the people behind it deserve compensation. It wouldn't do to allow vultures to sit by the sidelines and just copy the invention after all the hard work is done.

But yeah, the copyright and patent systems has been extended, abused, and gone beyond all its original perimeters, as bureacracies are prone to do. But is the other extreme much better here? Patents should be reformed, but how?

Re:Sick (1)

damnfuct (861910) | about 5 years ago | (#28585499)

yarr

Re:Sick (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 5 years ago | (#28585537)

What happened to grog, wenches and plunder?

In fact, forget the plunder!

It should appeal to the US too (5, Interesting)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about 5 years ago | (#28585297)

US legislators appear to have forgotten that during the early phases of US growth, the US refused to acknowledge any foreign intellectual property - European books were copied and published in the US with no royalties whatsoever, and it was no less a person than Rudyard Kipling, all of whose works were stolen in this way, who described the US as a country of pirates. The US was one of the last developed countries to sign the Berne Convention, which it did not do till 1st March 1989. So you could say that the US only formally ceased to be a pirate itself 20 years ago.

Re:It should appeal to the US too (3, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 5 years ago | (#28585357)

US legislators appear to have forgotten that during the early phases of US growth, the US refused to acknowledge any foreign intellectual property

Why do you think that they have forgotten? Quite the contrary, I believe that they're fully aware that present-day American economy has changed a lot since then, and large parts of it now depend on strong protection of "intellectual property".

Re:It should appeal to the US too (5, Insightful)

physicsphairy (720718) | about 5 years ago | (#28585407)

It doesn't make sense to value foreign IP unless you plan on pulling a big take from selling your domestic IP abroad. The U.S.'s position has coincided with its economic interests, not its moral opinion.

Right now China doesn't care much about copyright and patents, but you can bet in 20 years from when they have ceased trying to catch up to the superpower and effectively *are* the superpower, that they will be among those rallying for stronger enforcement.

Re:It should appeal to the US too (2, Interesting)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 5 years ago | (#28585573)

It's not uncommon actually. Switzerland developed in the same way. Eventually these countries start to produce their own IP and protecting it makes sense.

Re:It should appeal to the US too (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585821)

It's not uncommon actually. Switzerland developed in the same way. Eventually these countries start to produce their own IP and protecting it makes sense.

So the argument goes: We had to crap on everybody else's IP right to get where we are but now that we are here we will bully anybody else into submission who dares to take the same route...

Say what you will, that attitude is still 100% pure, unrefined hypocrisy.

Re:It should appeal to the US too (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | about 5 years ago | (#28585559)

This is the best logic EVAR! The US allowed books to be freely copied in the late 18th century, and therefore piracy should be legal in Sweden and Canada too I guess. Hey what, did late 18th century US laws have to say about keeping slaves, or divorcing your wife?

Re:It should appeal to the US too (2, Insightful)

servognome (738846) | about 5 years ago | (#28585613)

US legislators appear to have forgotten that during the early phases of US growth, the US refused to acknowledge any foreign intellectual property

And most people have forgotten that hunter-gatherers didn't recognize the ownership of land since it was unnecessary for their migratory societies. Yet today we recognize individuals can maintain control over a section of the earth merely with a piece of paper that says so.
Technology has changed what is considered valuable. The domestication of plants and animals required investment to develop land and therefore provided incentive for protecting pieces of land. The printing press diminished the significance of the physical act of writing, and placed more importance on the ideas conveyed. Automated mass production has elevated design above the skill of manual craftsmanship. Now, the internet once again has changed the structure of the economy, further intellectualizing and virtualizing the resources we desire.
Generally, people "pirate" the creations of giant marketing machines. They pay for virtual clothes for virtual people in virtual worlds. We are transitioning into an ethereal realm, where identities, economies, and communities can't be covered by the laws designed for the physical world. The legal concepts under development aren't just there to stop the downloading of the latest pop music, intellectual property protects our DNA code, purchases, travel habits, and other information individuals consider private.

Was OK, until the dumb stuff at the end.... (5, Insightful)

Mathinker (909784) | about 5 years ago | (#28585675)

> intellectual property protects our DNA code, purchases, travel habits, and
> other information individuals consider private.

What universe do you live in? You have it exactly reversed (or, I really didn't understand what you meant to say). Large corporations have patented the human DNA of individuals for their own gain [nationalgeographic.com] . They haven't started to sue the children of the people whose genes they sequenced, but if Monsanto can succeed in suing an organic farmer whose crops were contaminated by their patented genes [gmofreemendo.com] (the link is for a more recent Canadian case, but they already won a similar case in the US!), it isn't unthinkable that it could happen in the future.

Other large corporations, Google, for example, keep all kinds of records of people's web preferences, credit card purchases, and tons of other "information that individuals consider private", and if anyone is protected by IP rights in those cases, it's the corporations, not the individuals!

IP rights only extend to "creative works", and there has yet to be a court system which defines "deciding to buy something" or "deciding to click a particular ad" as "creative".

Most welcome, Canadian brethren (4, Interesting)

CrystalFalcon (233559) | about 5 years ago | (#28585305)

As an official in the Swedish Pirate Party, I can only wish our Canadian brothers and sisters a heartily welcome up onto the barricades, and the best of winds.

We are changing the world together.

Re:Most welcome, Canadian brethren (1)

adamlazz (975798) | about 5 years ago | (#28585867)

Two Canadian stories in a row on yro.slashdot.org on July 4! We are changing the world together.

The neoconservatives are laughing (4, Interesting)

unlametheweak (1102159) | about 5 years ago | (#28585307)

The Pirate Party is coming to Canada.

It's likely to split the non-neoconservative vote even further into obscurity.

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585347)

It's likely to split the non-neoconservative vote even further into obscurity.

It's your own fault [wikipedia.org] .

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (5, Informative)

unlametheweak (1102159) | about 5 years ago | (#28585353)

To elaborate, we have at least 4 (serious) political contenders who are in (or near) the center of the political spectrum here in Canada:
- The Marijuana Party
- The New Democratic Party
- The Green Party
- The Pirate Party (the new kid on the block)

These parties compete primarily with the Liberal Party (Canada's unofficial right-wing party); and the Liberal party is the only party that can offer any serious opposition to the Conservative party (Canada's unofficial neoconservative party), who tends to remain strong unless there is consistent and persistent and extreme scandals and incompetency during their terms in office (sorta like how the Republicans remain quite strong in the US despite their scandals and in-competencies).

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (4, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 5 years ago | (#28585599)

I'm not sure I would describe the Pirate Party of Canada as "serious". Their website appears to contain no manifesto. It does link to the "International Pirate Party" website though, so I looked there ... but the section of that website to do with policies simply points you to a web forum where a bunch of people are arguing about what that should be.

That leaves the original Pirate Party of Sweden. What are their policies? At least they do have some. Unfortunately they are self-contradictory and poorly thought out. For instance they believe that copyright should not apply for "non commercial use", ie, file sharing should be free. But what counts as commercial use then? They appear to think that, for example, a musician who writes music for a video game should get paid (and the law would enforce that) but the creators of the video game themselves probably won't get paid, depending on the whims of their customers. That makes absolutely no sense, because then the musician just wouldn't get hired at all. They also want to abolish pharma patents, and their proposed replacement is "government does all research". Somebody needs to study some basic economics, starting with Adam Smith.

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (2, Insightful)

selven (1556643) | about 5 years ago | (#28585807)

Nineteenth century capitalism collapses when everything you make can be copied and shared at will. Government funding all research isn't such a bad idea, comparing to the pharma monopolies we have now.

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (1)

selven (1556643) | about 5 years ago | (#28585793)

So our voting system is at fault. Perhaps we should take (dare I say steal) a few ideas from the Swedish system that got the pirates a seat in parliament.

Re:The neoconservatives are laughing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585375)

You are aware that American neoconservativism is not at all like American Conservatism, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Australia Too (5, Informative)

QuantumG (50515) | about 5 years ago | (#28585313)

Pirate Party Australia [pirateparty.org.au] , join as a preliminary member today!

Re:Australia Too (5, Funny)

Starayo (989319) | about 5 years ago | (#28585343)

Argh! Sex Party? Pirate Party? DON'T MAKE ME CHOOSE, MAN!

Re:Australia Too (2, Informative)

hh4m (1549861) | about 5 years ago | (#28585639)

the hard part is choosing between marijuana party, green party n pirate party... quite frankly, i dnt thing we need these separate parties either... we need one party with a sensible constitution which pushes these agendas, united. These aren't the only agendas, as the world grown n changes, there are many "sensible" agendas that need a voice. we cant make a new party for every one of them...

Re:Australia Too (1)

sxeraverx (962068) | about 5 years ago | (#28585697)

That's not so bad... Here in Japan, I see fliers for the Happiness Party everywhere I go.

Re:Australia Too (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585399)

And the UK [pirateparty.org.uk] .

Re:Australia Too (1)

4v4l0n42 (897836) | about 5 years ago | (#28585405)

The pirates are coming. At this point, there's no stopping them.
Therir weapons have evolved over time. I can see them riding their bloodthirsty kangaroos, screaming in excitement.

Run. RUN!

Mod parent up! (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 5 years ago | (#28585565)

It's just as important!

Bad idea (1)

techmuse (160085) | about 5 years ago | (#28585331)

While it is certainly true that many patents have been granted of late for things that should not pass the obviousness test, patents do provide a strong incentive to develop new technologies. They provide a monopoly on new inventions for a limited period of time in exchange for disclosing the details of that technology to the world, so it can later be used like others. If technologies can not be patented, they can be easily duplicated, and researchers will lose their investment when competitors simply duplicate their work without going to the initial research expense. A better solution would be to properly fund the patent office so that they can hire a sufficient number of examiners with a sufficient depth of expertise to be able to eliminate obvious patents and rapidly process valid ones.

Patents & Copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585401)

There is a world of Difference between Patents & Copyright.

What many people are protesting about (by using Pirate Bay etc) is Copyright.
The RIAA are bringing cases of Copyright Violation.

If the the likes of the RIAA had their way, even the works of Shakespear & Chaucer wiuld be put back into Copytight so they could make mony from them.

The likes of the RIAA etc are only after one thing. Money and more money. The more they get in the more they can spend on pursuing other people in order to get more money etc etc etc. They are not interested in paying the damages to artists whoose copyright may or may not have been violated.

Re:Bad idea (4, Insightful)

swilver (617741) | about 5 years ago | (#28585493)

My problems with patents is that as more and more people work in a certain field, the change of independent discovery of an idea increases drastically (especially the so-called "ideas" one sees patented these days). In the software world, any reasonable competent programmer comes up with any number of ideas during the course of their work (sometimes also referred to as "reinventing the wheel", although perhaps on a smaller scale).

Programming software therefore is rapidly becoming a huge patent minefield, one which is not easily avoided since reinventing the wheel is pretty common in software development. Taking time to study patents to see if none were violated would make the cost of writing even the simplest software prohibitive. It would be like writing a message (like this one), except I'd have to check with the patent office if certain ways of expressing my thoughts (like one does in programming) aren't someone's exclusive property.

In my opinion, the entire of idea of patenting something is assuming that you or your company are so smart that it could not possibly have been discovered by the other 6 billion people on the planet (whether they already did it before you which is often the case, or discover it independently later).

Re:Bad idea (3, Insightful)

maxwell demon (590494) | about 5 years ago | (#28585533)

I'm not so sure. First, I think patents don't provide an incentive to invent. People don't invent in order to get patents, they invent in order to get solutions to problems. What patents are supposed top do is to make those inventions public knowledge, and enable other people to build upon them.

However, I'm doubtful that even this part works well. Say a company has made an invention, and now has to decide whether to patent it or keep it secret. Now if the invention is non-obvious enough that you don't expect anyone to re-invent it until the end of the patent protection, you certainly won't patent it. It would only give you disadvantages: Short term, because you'd pay patent fees for a protection which secrecy would give you for free, and long term because after the protection period ends, your idea is in the wild, while with secrecy there's a chance you can protect it much longer.

Therefore you will patent only inventions which are

  • either obvious enough that someone else might re-invent it during the patent-protection period,
  • or if it is very hard to keep secret.

In both cases, the knowledge would have become public knowledge anyway.

Re:Bad idea (3, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 5 years ago | (#28585585)

Like copyright law, patent law was never meant to prevent the duplication of a product, process, or idea. It was only meant to prevent the duplication FOR PROFIT.

I personally met one individual who patented a method to modify carburetors to increase fuel mileage. He sold his patent to GM. The man still worked on cars, and modified those big Chevy Impalas to get 30+ MPG. If he worked on your car, he could not accept payment. Doing so would have put him in violation of patent law. But, doing the very same work for his own amusement was perfectly legal.

It's a shame GM wasn't putting that patent to use 40 years ago, when they bought it. They might not be bankrupt today.......

Re:Bad idea (1)

hedwards (940851) | about 5 years ago | (#28585805)

That's not true. Copyright has limited exceptions that don't preclude profiting without paying. Patents are in a similar situation.

The main issue with IP is that it's not balanced with the needs of the populace for whom patents were created and we've got no laws against patent trolling. Patents really ought to be like trademarks use them or lose them, with possible a third option in cases where it's not being used for reasonable reasons. Not to mention a complete ban on blocking patents.

Patents (1)

GF678 (1453005) | about 5 years ago | (#28585337)

It also wants to phase out patents

A lofty goal, but it's not realistic. Patents are abused, but they're also so ingrained into our society that it's unthinkable to not have any patents whatsoever. Everyone's made the joke that if they invent something that could make them a lot of money, they'll patent it.

Perhaps the idea should be to take patents back to the original purpose of them - to protect the inventor from other people stealing their ideas, and NOT to be used as a legal weapon against other companies.

Re:Patents (1)

pudro (983817) | about 5 years ago | (#28585503)

Perhaps the idea should be to take patents back to the original purpose of them - to protect the inventor from other people stealing their ideas, and NOT to be used as a legal weapon against other companies.

Perhaps the idea should be to take patents back to the original purpose of them - to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, and NOT to protect the inventor from other people stealing their ideas.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Patents (1)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | about 5 years ago | (#28585617)

Well that's not entirely true. It helped the progress of science and useful arts by protecting the inventor from being copied for a reasonable period of time.

Pirate party official party in Finland too (1)

barwasp (1116567) | about 5 years ago | (#28585395)

They [piraattipuolue.fi] were registered a bit too late for being able to participate in last months EU-elections.

... but Congratulations to the Swedish pirate party [piratpartiet.se] for their EU - parliament seat.

Multinational Political Party (2, Interesting)

njen (859685) | about 5 years ago | (#28585413)

What is extremely interesting to me is that we are now seeing a multinational political party! Has there ever been such a thing before? It's not too far fetched to say that there might be a Pirate Party in all the major developed countries in the near future. This is truly an interesting prospect indeed.

I mean these Pirate Parties might not have a majority in any of the countries they are in, but in the near future, the (theoretical) sum total of these parties in each country may well be one of the single biggest political movements across the world we have ever seen.

Re:Multinational Political Party (2, Informative)

oiron (697563) | about 5 years ago | (#28585445)

As unfashionable as they may be today, there was the Ba'ath party [wikipedia.org] of Saddam Hussein fame.

Also, the various Socialist/Communist Internationals could be considered too: First International, Second International [wikipedia.org] , Comintern [wikipedia.org] and some other not-so-internationals too...

While not parties, the European revolutions (1848, etc) were international in character to some extent...

Yes, its Piracy (1, Insightful)

DiamondGeezer (872237) | about 5 years ago | (#28585415)

The Pirate Party is coming to Canada. The party's goals are fairly simple. ... It ... wants to phase out patents.

Of course. What better way for people to be robbed of their intellectual property and the fruits of their hard work than to find that they cannot patent it, so it will be ripped off by the nearest corporation with the deepest pockets.

The Pirate Party of Somalia is similarly opposed to the notion of private shipping and of the notion of the personal liberty of seamen without payment, feeling as it does that the contents of shipowners bank accounts should be freely available to all gun-toting, Allah-fearin' liberators of other people's wealth.

Re:Yes, its Piracy (2, Insightful)

Koookiemonster (1099467) | about 5 years ago | (#28585487)

Of course. What better way for people to be robbed of their intellectual property and the fruits of their hard work than to find that they cannot patent it, so it will be ripped off by the nearest corporation with the deepest pockets.

Rick Falkvinge talked about that in Google techtalks.

Patenting costs a lot of time and money - too much for private individuals. Even if you did patent something, and a big company would infringe your patent, you'd be in one helluva court battle. Needless to say: at least in some places money will buy justice.

Official website here (4, Informative)

Langfat (953252) | about 5 years ago | (#28585431)

For anyone interested in getting involved, check out the forum at http://www.piratepartyofcanada.com [piratepartyofcanada.com] - Doesn't look like there's much going on yet, but hopefully that will change shortly...

Re:Official website here (2, Informative)

Langfat (953252) | about 5 years ago | (#28585449)

Here's the Facebook group [facebook.com] too. Sorry for the double post, there's no edit button...

As a Canadian, my thoughts (4, Insightful)

V50 (248015) | about 5 years ago | (#28585453)

My thoughts on this. First of all, the part is irrelevant, they have no chance of electoral success, they probably will only even run candidates in a handful of ridings. Even if they did run in all 308 ridings, they have no chance to get more than, at best, 5% of the vote in their best riding (and even that is a stretch). Our system, which has been confirmed by several recent referendums, essentially makes any votes for them "wasted" in a few ways. I'd still recommend anyone vote for them, if they support their principles.

As for my thoughts on copyrights in general. I'm a generally libertarian leaning Conservative. I don't like how the RIAA/MPAA is conducting themselves. I don't like the abuses of patent systems, and I think copyright lasts way too long. I'd be completely in favor of reform of those.

That being said, I feel the general idea of copyrights and patents is a sound one. IMO, people should have ownership over ideas and works that they create. An aspect of ownership is the right to deny use of your property to others.

I see this in a similar manner as land ownership. Land ownership is a similarly abstract concept. One can only "own" land based on the collective agreement of the population, and the government. Likewise, even if one is not using a tract of land one owns, one can deny access to it from others.

That being said, like a typical goodthinking Slashbot, I hate DRM, think the RIAA/MPAA are a bunch of thugs, and feel that copyrights last way too long (I think patents last about the right length, but stupid crap shouldn't be patentable). I don't, however, feel this gives people a right to pirate whatever they feel like, nor do I think it invalidates the idea of copyright, in general. (For my background, I'm a 22 year old white Canadian male who buys his games, music and movies, and buys a great deal of them.)

I'd be interested in seeing well thought out disagreements, of course. I'm also sure my thoughts and my analogy could be worded much better. I'm usually terrible at getting my point across.

Re:As a Canadian, my thoughts (4, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | about 5 years ago | (#28585529)

people should have ownership over ideas

      I disagree. How can you be so egotistical as to think that you are the only one in the world that has had a given "idea"? How can you prevent - no - PENALIZE someone else from having the same idea?

      This is why IDEAS cannot be patented, and never should be. Lawyers have been trying to do end-runs around this concept for decades now.

      The development of an idea into something useful - a working prototype, a unique machine, an application of that idea that requires time, money and skill to create - yes, this should be given certain LIMITED protection. But the idea itself? You don't deserve to be paid just because you thought about something and put it on paper.

Re:As a Canadian, my thoughts (2, Interesting)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | about 5 years ago | (#28585647)

ideas and works that they create

I could be entirely wrong, but I took the word "create" at the end of the sentence to mean exactly what you listed under something useful.

Re:As a Canadian, my thoughts (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 5 years ago | (#28585873)

I see this in a similar manner as land ownership.

Land: Scarce, [wikipedia.org] rival [wikipedia.org] and excludable. [wikipedia.org]
Ideas: None of the Above

English Pirate Party? (1)

lattyware (934246) | about 5 years ago | (#28585473)

Can we have one in England too?

Re:English Pirate Party? (1)

Asclepius99 (1527727) | about 5 years ago | (#28585631)

You could see about forming one?

The goals are *WAY* bigger! (4, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 5 years ago | (#28585511)

First and foremost, they oppose any kind of censorship and totalitarian government.
Then comes the goal to move from the imaginary "intellectual property" scheme back to what copyright, authors right and the freedom of ideas once were meant to be.
They are not for the exploitation of artists. That is what the **AA is for.

This TFS(ummary) is probably the worst summary of a party program I have ever read.
Maybe some people are just so used to parties an programs being meaningless because they all belonged to the same industry lobbies anyway, that they do not pay attention to them anymore. :/

Me, Bender (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585567)

i'm going to make my own pirate party, with blackjack... and hookers!

Still called "The Pirate Party?" Get real. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585581)

I can't believe they used the name "Pirate Party" to begin with, let alone using the same name now in other countries. Yes it's all very cute and funny. We get it. Most other people do not. These folks will receive NO respect from the ruling class until they change their name and their cavalier attitude. Popular opinion can only be swayed by their brazen display for so long until the mainstream spindoctors throw up a brick wall faster than an underpaid Chinese pseudo-slave. This kind of childish nonsense might cut it in fake countries like Sweden, but if they even plan on expanding their influence to Canada or Australia for real, let alone Germany, the UK, or the US, then they will have to learn to play ball the old fashioned way. In my country (US), calling your political group "The Pirate Party" is a one-way ticket to derision and dismissal. Grow up or get out.

Private use as opposed to what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585629)

If it's legal to download stuff for private use, what's the incentive for commercial use? Why buy a cow if milk is free? Take the example of coin collecting, some coins are worth huge piles of money above and beyond their face value. In the end, the price is supported by somebody who wants to be able to hold and stare at that particular Roman coin or whatever, to enjoy it "privately". All the price catalogs etc. are for the purpose of making that coinophile pay for his passion.

PirateBay sold out and is sinking (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585643)

Funny Swedish law has changed, the piratebay has sunk and people realize they can go on with their lives without having their daily Warez.

Oh nooo, the pirates can't ride on the coattails and suck on the tit of American/British movie/music producers for their sites.

How about a PirateParty that promotes artist and actually show their system of 'free' music/movies actually works. All I see is them riding on the coattails of Americans creativity and talking smack, what is wrong with those other countries that they are not as creative as Americans/British? You know that giant blockbuster and Academy award winning Swedish film? Sorry the only good thing to come out of Sweden is Will Ferrell and even he realized the talent/creativity was in America.

Going out on a limb here and saying the lack of creativity is caused by the markets and laws that affect copyright, therefore there is no incentive to achieve higher in these countries.

Go make a good movie and prove all these 'evil corporate' masters wrong. Big talk around here about getting at 'the man' but not willing to do much than otherwise click 'download torrent' and posting BS articles how the judges were all corrupt in the trial. Whatever came out of these corrupt judges, oh wait there will be another corrupt judge when they upstand the ruling again against ThePirateBay(sold out).

ByeBye piratebay and European flavor of the week political parties.

Anyone interested there has been discussions... (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | about 5 years ago | (#28585663)

... on at various places like The Globe and mail which have not gotten that much media attention.

Globes Public policy wiki:

http://policywiki.theglobeandmail.com/tiki-forums.php [theglobeandmail.com]

Copyright Chat:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/download-decade/law-professor-takes-questions-on-copyright/article1141598/ [theglobeandmail.com]

Fact is copyright as it stands right now is ludicrous for many things, software that ends up being abandonware, game companies that release games and then don't release the source (which should be released so fans of the game can fix and patch the stuff developers didn't bother with, etc).

We need more John Carmacks in the world that realize that releasing the source doesn't harm you. He's released the source to nearly all of his game engines so I give him major thanks.

Enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#28585695)

It is now time for a Ninja Party!

Copyright? Personal integrity and privacy! (1)

pengipengi (1352837) | about 5 years ago | (#28585703)

What made the Pirate Party successful in sweden wasn't, at least as I've seen it, the questions about copyright and "illegal" downloading and copying. What made the Priate Party successful this time is about personal integrity and privacy to the people.

During last year, the swedish goverment have created laws which allows companies which claims that their work have been downloaded from an IP-address to get all information about the person behind that IP. That law is called IPRED.

FRA (Försvarets Radioanstalt / National Defence Radio Establishment, in sweden) got a law that allowes them to monitor all traffic on internet that crosses the swedish border, which practially means that they got access to all internet traffic for the people in sweden. Most mayor sites used isn't placed in sweden, like facebook, hotmail... (probably only thepiratebay earlier).

So the Pirate Party's mayor goal for this election was to work for the privacy of the swedish people.

(I'm a student from Gothenburg, Sweden)

There's more to it (1)

stesch (12896) | about 5 years ago | (#28585749)

You are oversimplifying the goals. There's more to it. Or you just repeat what the MSM is reporting about the Pirate Party. But the MSM is in fear right now because they have the most to lose from a success of the Pirate Parties. Here's the program of the German Piratenpartei: http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Bundestagswahlprogramm_Kernthemen [piratenpartei.de]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>