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!

Filesharing Now an Official Religion In Sweden

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the but-do-they-have-snacks-and-coffee? dept.

Piracy 358

bs0d3 writes "Kopimism is now an official religion in Sweden. Kopimi beliefs originated with the Swedish group called Piratbyran who believed that everything should be shared freely online without restrictions from copyright. Leader Isak Gerson, has recently had some disagreements with the Swedish Pirate Party where many people disagree with all religions." Here's the official website for the "Missionary Church of Kopimism."

cancel ×

358 comments

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

Is the clipboard (5, Funny)

TheTruthIs (2499862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587398)

their holy scripture?

Re:Is the clipboard (3, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587442)

I would rather bet on the Creative Commons license. ;-)

Re:Is the clipboard (5, Interesting)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587532)

Creative Commons license, and GPL for that matter, are pro-copyright by their very definition. Only public domain is anti-copyright.

Re:Is the clipboard (4, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587648)

PD isn't exactly anti-copyright. Technically, you can take a Public Domain work, change it (even a little, add a space), and copyright it yourself. It is more of a "copyright irrelevant" non-license. You don't have to worry or think about copyright at all, if you choose. Literally, you, me, and everyone here can all claim copyright on virtually the same Public Domain work, legally.

Of course, if you copyright it, you can't take away anyone's right to copy or use the Public Domain version all they want.

Re:Is the clipboard (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587852)

Except that you copyright the work using something other then public domain for it when you perform the operation you're mentioning. Which makes your entire argument against PD completely irrelevant, as by same definition I could argue that very act of thinking of an idea is pro-copyright, because I could eventually copyright the contents of the idea. The merit of that argument is identical to yours.

Re:Is the clipboard (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587878)

PD isn't exactly anti-copyright. Technically, you can take a Public Domain work, change it (even a little, add a space), and copyright it yourself.

No, you can't. If you take a public domain work and change it only a little bit, you've created a derivative work of the public domain work, and the expired copyright that once applied to the public domain work now applies to your new derivative work. And by the way, if all you did was add a space, it wouldn't even be considered a derivative work, it would still be the same work. In order for a new copyright to attach, your changes would have to be significant enough to be considered "transformative" which is, unfortunately, somewhat subjective.

Literally, you, me, and everyone here can all claim copyright on virtually the same Public Domain work, legally.

Well, yes, you, me and the whole world can claim copyright on the exact same public domain work. That is what public domain means, everyone has the right to copy it, hence, the copyright. What you, me and the world can't do is claim exclusive copyright. Once the original copyright has run up, no one can claim that.

Re:Is the clipboard (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587756)

Creative Commons license, and GPL for that matter, are pro-copyright by their very definition. Only public domain is anti-copyright.

Didn't RMS say something like: If there were no copyright, the GPL wouldn't be needed.

My take on GPL is that it uses/subverts a bad tool for something good (keping free stuff free), while its creator would rather see no copyright at all (everything always free). Hardly pro-copyright...

Re:Is the clipboard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587890)

Exactly. The primary goal of the GPL was to create a copyleft bubble in which everybody could take, copy, use and share everything and in which copyright would de facto not exist.

Re:Is the clipboard (2)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587940)

Ok, but in a non-copyright world I would have absolutely 0 obligation to share changes for source, or publish source for anything I make. I think the goals of anti-copyright and Free software are at opposition here - one says "copy freely, do what you please", the other says "copy freely, you must let others copy too!", which is a restriction that could have no weight or bearing in a no copyright world.

Re:Is the clipboard (4, Funny)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587594)

Depends, if they were Evangelical Kopimists, then the GNU/GPL is the only TRUE gospel. Not only do you accept It into your life, but you must spread the word in all your earthly works.

The ones that follow the Creative Commons are like the people who only go to church on Christmas and Easter. They aren't real believers, they are "just in case it is true, at least I will get into heaven" believers.

Re:Is the clipboard (1)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587748)

No, if they were Evangelical Kopimists, then they would violate GPL just like every other copyright license.

Re:Is the clipboard (4, Insightful)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587850)

There's already a Church of GNU Emacs. One of its tenets is that if you take the Church too seriously, seek professional help.

Re:Is the clipboard (4, Insightful)

GuldKalle (1065310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588080)

Why didn't all religions have that?

Re:Is the clipboard (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588296)

I've heard that Emacs has a great psychologist hotline embedded within it.

Re:Is the clipboard (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587596)

No, that is the holy sharing grail.

Re:Is the clipboard (5, Funny)

Narishma (822073) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587778)

As long as Clippy isn't their prophet we are safe.

Re:Is the clipboard (2)

noobermin (1950642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588308)

That sounds more like 4chan.

It could be worse (5, Insightful)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587404)

They could preach slavery, rape, murder, hating on gays/women/divorcees.
Oh wait, that would probably let them justify having a state on top of a religion ^^

Re:It could be worse (0)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587554)

Only so in the western world. Buddhist countries, especially Theravada ones, lack that. That's why they're much more saner religions than western ones.

Re:It could be worse (5, Insightful)

JimCanuck (2474366) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587764)

Yes because slavery and lack of rights didn't exist under the "peaceful" way of life when the Dalai Lama was in charged of Tibet./sarcasm

Re:It could be worse (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587860)

Only so in the western world. Buddhist countries, especially Theravada ones, lack that. That's why they're much more saner religions than western ones.

And yet, it's illegal to even criticize the Monarchy in Thailand, Myanmar is a military dictatorship, and Cambodia had some of the worst atrocities this century.

No religion (or country, or ethnic group) is above all of this crap ... granted, Buddhism doesn't have as much of a bent towards such things, but that doesn't mean that cultural attitudes don't get wrapped up in such thing.

But, really, I've read stories about monks in Thailand (not to single them out) being involved in all sorts of things [blogspot.com] . I've even read stories of two sects openly fighting for control of temples because money was at stake.

I wouldn't be so quick to believe that Buddhism (even Theravada) makes one immune to this kind of thing. Human nature means it is always there.

It's easy enough to call yourself a practitioner of any religion and then proceed to all sorts of bad things in that name of that religion.

Re:It could be worse (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587922)

You mean like China?

And isnt Theravada Buddhism big in Cambodia, or perhaps I should say Democratic Kampuchea?

As always, attempts to link this religion or that to "people being bad" fail hard. People will murder, rape, pillage, etc other people as long as humans remain human.

Re:It could be worse (2)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587952)

The Shinto religion was the vessel through which militarism and nationalism of Japan prior to WW2 was carried.

Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (4, Insightful)

prakslash (681585) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587564)

Although they are only preaching "harmless" digital copying, followers of a religion can still be prosecuted for their actual practice if it is deemed criminal under the prevailing laws.

"Freedom of Religion" rights enshrined in the constitutions of most countries rarely provide for exceptions to go against the prevailing laws. So, this new religion won't change anything. A better path is being followed by the Pirate Party who actually seeks to change the prevailing laws around information copying.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (4, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587708)

That depends upon how good the religion's lobbyists and lawyers are. The US has a few cases of that sort of thing - surprisingly, not all Christian. A native american tribe managed to successfully challenge the Migratory Bird Act so they could sacrifice federally-protected golden eagles as part of their rituals, and won. The Amish are very well known for it, because their lifestyle has a great many minor conflicts - things like requiring all buildings be produced entirely within the community, which means they can't use fireproofing treatments for wood required by state law. It really comes down, as so much does, to a combination of legal skill, funding and the luck of finding a sympathetic court.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588246)

The US has a few cases of that sort of thing - surprisingly, not all Christian.
 
You know, if you'd stop your hating on Christians and take a true secular look on America you'd come to realize that America really isn't all that Christian to begin with. I know, I know, Christianity is the root of all evil and every time a law is passed that might hint at the slightest bit of morality it's a brainwashed Christian who did it... Yeah, whatever.
 
the fact of the matter is that if the US was as Christian as you haters make it out to be stuff like abortion wouldn't have been legal for nearly 40 years now. According to you haters we were still having tent revivals and witch burnings back in those days.
 
If anything is out of contact with reality it's you guys.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (2)

wolfie123 (1331071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587732)

Fun fact: In Finland, the only person you should confess a murder to is a priest. Even the court can't force a priest to break the secrecy.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587962)

Fun fact: In Finland, the only person you should confess a murder to is a priest. Even the court can't force a priest to break the secrecy.

Isn't this true in most of North America and Europe? I don't believe this is unique to Finland.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (4, Insightful)

Capt James McCarthy (860294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587974)

"Fun fact: In Finland, the only person you should confess a murder to is a priest. Even the court can't force a priest to break the secrecy."

Better fact: The best kept secret is the one that no one else knows about.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (4, Funny)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588192)

"Fun fact: In Finland, the only person you should confess a murder to is a priest. Even the court can't force a priest to break the secrecy."

Better fact: The best kept secret is the one that no one else knows about.

So then you kill the priest immediately after confession. Which gives you another murder to confess, presumably to another priest. The Catholics have over 400000 [allaboutreligion.org] of them, so you won't run out for some time.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (3, Insightful)

Blue Stone (582566) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587808)

I dunno. Seems to me that religious institutions get plenty of opt-outs form the law when it comes to discrimination against gays.

The rule seeming to be that if you codify your prejudice, it's OK.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (1, Interesting)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587964)

Seems to me that religious institutions get plenty of opt-outs form the law when it comes to discrimination against gays.

Not having to perform a marriage ceremony is not a violation of someone's rights.

This is the same as that whole "can a doctor be forced to perform an abortion, even if he thinks it is murder" thing, and its really scary that some people think the answer is yes, and fail to see how thats a fundamental violation of the doctor's rights.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588094)

"Not having to perform a marriage ceremony is not a violation of someone's rights."
Forcing the government to deny equal rights and protections based on the religious preferences of the majority is.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (3, Insightful)

Blue Stone (582566) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588218)

>Not having to perform a marriage ceremony is not a violation of someone's rights.

Not having to = allowed to discriminate against. Have I got that right? Thought so.

Tell you what, I'll be prepared to have a serious discussion with you when you're prepared to defend the 'right' of others to discriminate against you in the same way as you wish to discriminate against others. That sounds fair, doesn't it? Quid pro quo and all that.

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (4, Insightful)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588272)

Well, if the mother asks for it, and the doctor is the only one available to perform the procedure, then he should be forced to, or forced to retire. The doc signed up to be the caretaker of health for the community, and must perform his duties, or step down. You seem to think the doctor's rights as the health professional of a community supersede the rights of a woman towards her body. The doc can't push his ethics on others, he has no right to force a woman to keep her baby. He can do his job, or he can do what everyone else does, and quit. Simply saying "no" is not an option, and sets a dangerous precedent. What happens when the doc declines to give gays treatment for STDs? Or any other of the myriad of times when an MD is forced to treat someone whos religious views clash with their own?

Re:Religious Prosecution of File Sharers (1)

Gunnut1124 (961311) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587820)

I wonder if it will protect them if they attempt to publish/promote HOW to share files...

Re:It could be worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587758)

Christians already got their first.

Re:It could be worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588250)

I didn't realise Christianity had its own state??? The bible, the word of God - that can not be ambiguous as it was created by a perfect being has those elements (rape, murder, etc). I'm still waiting for my mom, a devout Christian, to explain why God asked a man to have sex with his brother's wife, while the brother was still alive :)

The result will be deadly (5, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587428)

sectarian violence between Kopimists and the ABBAnites over lost royalty tithe income.

so. (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587444)

So he who toil and grule for months on end to make good to benefit many... Shalt not receive reward or compensation, for they create media and that shall be bread enough alone.

Re:so. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587770)

Copyright isn't about people being paid for their creations. It's about forcing people to pay to be able to use/enjoy/whatever one's creation. That's a subtle but important difference.

Without copyright, creators of content would still be paid - they were for centuries. They'll simply have less control over what they "should" be paid, putting estimation of value in the hands of the consumer instead of the producer. Scary.

Re:so. (2)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587996)

Copyright has nothing to do with payment or lack of it. Copyright just gives creator the right to control his work.

Re:so. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588038)

around where i live they throw out more bread than they sell.

Re:so. (2, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588284)

Let me put it to you this way. I'm a freelance programmer. I only get paid when I work. Most of the time I'm not working in any framework, it's all my code that I have "copyright" over that I'm being paid to adapt for others. Once I sell and/or install the system for the company or individual, they do not pay me royalty for each and every copy. It's like I'm an employee in just about every other field. Lawyers don't get paid when they're not working, neither do mechanics...

Now, I write very modular code, so I COULD try to sell the copies of the programs and enforce artificial scarcity via DRM; However, only my effort of creation is scarce -- copies are in infinite supply. Eco101:
If (supply == infinity) then price = 0; // regardless of cost to create.
As you can see, to charge per copy is folly.

When I worked as a salaried employee I got paid to work, and saw no residual benefit from my efforts. To get bonuses I had to work hard, to get raises I had to be a reliable worker (and good brown noser). However, the programs I worked on made the company hundreds of millions of dollars, and they charged per seat. The company's artificial inflation was a burden to the world economy -- After the first profitable year selling the program they were making money disproportionate to the amount of work involved in installing or digitally distributing the software.

Since the programming job was "done" many coders on the project were laid off, and we really couldn't keep up with the level of support our demand generated. Perhaps that company would have stayed afloat if their initial prices were lower (subsidizing the creation of more code / more work), while having a more expensive support license. You see, they screwed themselves because once the customers had paid for the copy, they were no longer paying for the work of support!

When I struck out on my own I initially tried, foolishly, to duplicate the flawed model of artificial scarcity. I nearly wound up with a foreclosure before I realized that the pirate mentality is the correct mentality. Now people don't pay me for my programs, they pay for me to work on my programs or to create new programs. Bootstrapping myself into the "pirate" business model was a bit painful, but is very possible. I don't overcharge for distributions of bits and I live more comfortably and securely now than I ever have in my life.

I'm not really sure how Musicians, Artists & Actors, etc can implement a similar system, but I don't doubt they can.

Furthermore, I did not invent the computer, or (most of) the programming languages I use. I did not invent the concepts I use, my works only have meaning and value because they are a part of this rich culture. Honestly, I HAVE created literary works in wholly "alien" languages, and even number and time systems that I created [codelobe.com] , as an experiment to test this theory. Guess what? NO ONE VALUES THEM. They were not enough a part of the common culture to have worth. To build creations having worth you must borrow HEAVILY from the culture around you.

Being granted a +150 year monopoly (three generations of humans) for my tiny proportion of contribution to the massive amount of common culture in my work is Ridiculous! My grandkids will be DEAD by the time they can legally use any of the copyrighted work I contributed to the culture while a salaried employee. The founding fathers were correct: The copyright / patent terms should be 10 to 14 years. We've granted monopolies over bits of our culture far beyond the reasonable length of time. Piracy is merely a social pressure that's attempting to right this wrong in the only way they can: By ignoring unjust laws that are destroying our public domain. It's an act of civil disobedience. We granted the copyrights, we can take them all away if they are abused.

Copyright is a law, Jim Crow was a law. Rosa Parks was arrested for ignoring the unjust laws and sitting at the front of a bus. Pirates may be arrested for ignoring the unjust copyright laws and freely sharing our cultural works. I would say it's their duty to stand for what they believe in. It's illegal to masturbate in Texas -- I actively and openly admit to ignoring this, and other unjust laws. We have only Law Making bodies; There are no Law Unmaking bodies -- This is why Jury Nullification exists. In a corrupt environment that robs us of the capacity to change the laws, our last and only check against the unjust rule of law is our ability to ignore them.

Humans are information processing machines! Indeed, LIFE ITSELF began because the capacity to copying information (genetic code) freely is beneficial. May the best copier win! All of what you see around you is possible because of the sharing of ideas and knowledge in our culture. Making laws against Human Nature is the very definition of a police state!

Those stone age people who opposed copper, bronze and iron tools quickly became extinct. Welcome to the Information Age.

Joke (3, Interesting)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587472)

Does anyone really take things like this seriously? This and the "Pirate Party" only hurt copyright reform movements. Not to mention that if "everything should be shared freely online without copyright", the GPL wouldn't be able to protect code anymore.

Re:Joke (0)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587566)

The Pirate Party doesn't care about the GPL. What made you think they do?

Re:Joke (2)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587606)

I didn't say they did. The point is that getting rid of copyright means removing all power the GPL has, because it is a copyright license that protects code. People around here do care about the GPL. No idea why my OP would be modded down as "Troll" when I'm making a valid point. These pirate parties and religions are just things the rest of the world points and laughs at. It does no good for serious, legitimate copyright reform movements.

Re:Joke (3, Informative)

McGuirk (1189283) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587862)

Getting rid of copyright would mean that the GPL wouldn't need to exist anymore.

Re:Joke (1)

GuldKalle (1065310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588212)

Not true - you can keep source code hidden if there was no copyright.

Re:Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587880)

"These socialists are just things the rest of the world points and laughs at. It does not good for serious, hard working laborers" .
I'm pretty sure that's how socialism was treated at the time.

Re:Joke (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587924)

Without copyright law, there'd be nothing preventing us from decompiling everything. Yeah the source would be nice, but in the end it isn't necessary.

Re:Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587948)

Well, thinking about this shallowly, if copyright suddenly vanished, then the GPL would have no more power. However, neither would proprietary licenses. So while the requirement to release code with binaries would be removed, any instance of code existing already would then become public domain, as though it were effectively GPL'd.

The good thing is that all existing proprietary-licensed things become public and freedom-respecting.

The bad thing is that the requirements to produce source code with binaries, etc. vanish as well.

This reminds me of some table-top games I've been playing. "Activate scroll of anti-copyright: Effect: A significant one-time removal of all existing copyrights on all works on the table and in the deck. The effects of all cards within the deck and hand are also removed."

An interesting concept. It might not be bad initially. We may start to see more companies keeping their source code 'secret' though. Still, the shining ray of hope is that a huge amount of good will be done.

Re:Joke (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587918)

Does anyone really take things like this seriously? This and the "Pirate Party" only hurt copyright reform movements.

This? I doubt it, although it's always satisfying (if potentially counterproductive) to see people stretching the definition of 'religion' in order to exploit its preferential treatment.

As for the Pirate Party, I'm genuinely glad they exist. On balance I'd probably choose zero copyright over the mess we have now, although it's a close run thing, but realistically I think 15-20 year terms and an end to the legal abuse of copyright for censorship purposes are all we actually need to fix the system. In either case, the Pirate Party's voice at one extreme should help to balance the mainstream politicians' voices at the other end of the spectrum, hopefully dragging the actual outcome towards the sane equilibrium that lies somewhere between "no copyright" and "infinite copyright", the latter of which being the de facto effect of the legislation chosen by every other political party.

Re:Joke (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588124)

In either case, the Pirate Party's voice at one extreme should help to balance the mainstream politicians' voices at the other end of the spectrum, hopefully dragging the actual outcome towards the sane equilibrium that lies somewhere between "no copyright" and "infinite copyright", the latter of which being the de facto effect of the legislation chosen by every other political party.

There is no sane middle. There are only half measures that are even worse than picking one and sticking with it.

Re:Joke (5, Insightful)

muuh-gnu (894733) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587946)

> only hurt copyright reform movements.

How exactly? Your alleged "serious" copyright reform movements never achieved anything of significance. The Pirate Party has achieved siginificant visibility in Europe. They have seats in the European Parliament, in the Berlin parliament and will probably get seats in the German federal parliament next year. They have already forced major parties to seriously rethink their internet policies or risk losing the whole sub-30 generation.

The GPL? Who gives a fuck??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588044)

Eat shit, faggoot.

Why? (-1, Troll)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587490)

Why is this on Slashdot? This is not news, not interesting, not amusing and ... not even all that original (see FSM)

REALLY???

Re:Why? (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587544)

Ohh come on. It is mocking religion AND stupid policy. Lighten up. It is hilarious. Is is definitely tech so definitely appropriate for Slashdot.

Re:Why? (1)

mrclisdue (1321513) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587568)

Because it's been hours, an eternity to ./, since God-bashing and Atheist-hating and....

Nevermind.

Re:Why? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587804)

Because it's been hours, an eternity to ./, since God-bashing and Atheist-hating and...

No, we were talking about Apple and Google (respectively) then.

This is different.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587572)

Killing two birds with one stone, attacking both copyright and religion.

Re:Why? (0)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587634)

.... looking stupid doing both ...

Re:Why? (1)

TheReaperD (937405) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587904)

That's the point. You point out the absurdity of an institution or action (in this case religion and copyright politics) by taking it to its most absurd extreme. It tends to work in other areas but religion seems immune to being shown its own absurdity. As an odd comparison, it shares that in common with disco (think the Funky Chicken).

Re:Why? (1)

DC2088 (2343764) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587786)

Because filesharing is tech related.

Religious Freedom (3, Informative)

ZerXes (1986108) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587546)

This might be interesting, due to some Swedish laws on religious freedom the Swedish police might have problems trying to seize the servers and computers of this followers as they are only practising their religion.

Re:Religious Freedom (2)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587600)

No, they can seize all they want. Religions don't exempt you from laws.

Re:Religious Freedom (1)

next_ghost (1868792) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587654)

Except in some status of USA.

Re:Religious Freedom (1)

next_ghost (1868792) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587664)

Damn... some states of USA.

Re:Religious Freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587776)

Irrelevant. This is about Sweden.

Christianity and broadcast rights (3)

Openstandards.net (614258) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587560)

I was just saying the other day that the Bible could of been harder to create if someone claimed broadcast rights when Jesus spoke to crowds, not to mention copyright restrictions with no one able to locate the authors or figure out who inherited their rights when they died. So, perhaps this is in line with Christianity.

Re:Christianity and broadcast rights (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587734)

US copyright law sets the term of an individually authored work as life plus a fixed term. If the bible is indeed true, then the copyright to those speeches is still held by Jesus - he never died. Wouldn't matter much though, as the instruction to spread the word could easily be seen as permission to copy.

Re:Christianity and broadcast rights (4, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587900)

Jesus did die, he rose from the grave by conquering death - according to the Bible, it's one of the key tenants of Christianity. Now, how would copyright law handle that?

Re:Christianity and broadcast rights (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588174)

tenants of Christianity

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tenet#English

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tenant#Noun

Re:Christianity and broadcast rights (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588312)

Twas an uncaught iPad autocorrection :(

Re:Christianity and broadcast rights (1)

six025 (714064) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588190)

Jesus did die, he rose from the grave by conquering death - according to the Bible, it's one of the key tenants of Christianity. Now, how would copyright law handle that?

Not sure, but Hollywood tells the story of a time travelling Jesus who arrives in 2013 to enter law school. His intention after graduation is to travel back to the year 0+3 days and sue the freakin' ass off this "copy cat" Jesus for rising from the grave and claiming to be Him. However, during the freshman year he meets a young but very pretty drug dealer named Mary Jane for whom he feels a strangely compelling sense of attachment, and so evolves a story of heart warming love.

And that, my friends, is how Jesus came to be the dope smoking, tree hugging hippy we know and love today.

Peace,
Andy.

Cryogenics, undead and broadcast rights (3, Interesting)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588066)

You bring up an interesting point ... but he did die, and was resurrected, so there *was* a time of death to begin the timer ticking for the fixed term.*

But if someone's brought back to life after a long period (eg, cryogenically frozen and we find a way to restore it), does the 'fixed term' reset, or did their time frozen get subtracted from when they die the second time? (eg, you get frozen, then thawed 40 years later ... then die 20 years later, do you get 70 years from then, or 30 (remaining of the 70), or 10 (the counter never stopped)?

And what does this mean for zombies, vampires and the other undead? I mean, the current wording is:

endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the authorâ(TM)s death.

So, as there's a gap between their life and their death, what does this mean for holders of copyright who become vampires? (zombies might not be an issue, as they died and were re-animated)

* Unless you go with the theory that bungled the crucifixtion and took him down when he was simply conconcious, so he never died, and the shroud of turin was evidence of a warm body.

MacChrist (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587578)

Jesus copied bread & fish to the people... How should the bakers and fishermen get paid?
I'd say, sue Jesus!

Re:MacChrist (1)

Shompol (1690084) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587698)

What fishermen? Thou shalt pay to Microsoft [allthingsd.com] for every fish and bread, or be sued into oblivion.

Site is down right now. (2)

Metricmouse (2532810) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587620)

Help! Help! I'm being repressed! ... bloody Romans.

Re:Site is down right now. (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587668)

Perhaps they should just share the admin passwords to their site so we can fix it.

Re:Site is down right now. (3, Funny)

itchythebear (2198688) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587678)

came here to see the violence inherent in the system
left satisfied.

Re:Site is down right now. (4, Informative)

cheesecake23 (1110663) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587694)

Since their webpage is slashdotted, here is the official press release from the Church of Kopimism:

The Church of Kopimism is recognized by the state of Sweden

Just before Christmas, the Swedish governmental agency Kammarkollegiet registered the Church of Kopimism as a religious organisation. This means that Sweden is the first country to recognize kopimism as a religion.

The Church of Kopimism have tried to become registered as a religious organisation by Kammarkollegiet for more than a year.

- Since Kammarkollegiet has been strict with formalities, we had to apply three times, a happy Gustav Nipe - board chairman for the organisation - says. He continues, I think it might have something to do with the governmental organisations abiding by a very copyright friendly attitude, with a twisted view on copying.

For the Church of Kopimism, information is holy and copying is a sacrament. Information holds a value, in itself and in what it contains, and the value multiplies through copying. Therefore, copying is central for the organisation and its members.

Being recognized by the state of Sweden is a large step for all of kopimi. Hopefully, this is one step towards the day when we can live out our faith without fear of persecution, says Isak Gerson, spiritual leader of the Church of Kopimism.

The Church of Kopimism is a religious organisation with roots from 2010. The organisation formalizes a community that's been well spread for a long time already. The community of kopimi requires no formal membership. You just have to feel a calling to worship what is the holiest of the holiest, information and copy. To do this, we organize kopyactings - religious services - where the kopimists share information with eachother through copying and remix.

Copy and seed.

Re:Site is down right now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587866)

I wonder what position a backup server admin would hold in such a religion? Backups are copying and preserving!

Re:Site is down right now. (1)

ltcdata (626981) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587968)

Si.. if i get a letter saying that i'm a filesharer and yada yada yada you will pay a lot fo money for that.. can i answer that my religion advocates that and walk away free?

Re:Site is down right now. (3, Insightful)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588138)

But what actual benefits are there to being recognized officially as a religion? I presume some tax benefits but that applies to any charity or non-profit entity.

Re:Site is down right now. (1)

j2kun (2353548) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588156)

Since their webpage is slashdotted, here is the official press release from the Church of Kopimism: The Church of Kopimism is recognized by the state of Sweden Just before Christmas, the Swedish governmental agency Kammarkollegiet registered the Church of Kopimism as a religious organisation. This means that Sweden is the first country to recognize kopimism as a religion. The Church of Kopimism have tried to become registered as a religious organisation by Kammarkollegiet for more than a year. - Since Kammarkollegiet has been strict with formalities, we had to apply three times, a happy Gustav Nipe - board chairman for the organisation - says. He continues, I think it might have something to do with the governmental organisations abiding by a very copyright friendly attitude, with a twisted view on copying. For the Church of Kopimism, information is holy and copying is a sacrament. Information holds a value, in itself and in what it contains, and the value multiplies through copying. Therefore, copying is central for the organisation and its members. Being recognized by the state of Sweden is a large step for all of kopimi. Hopefully, this is one step towards the day when we can live out our faith without fear of persecution, says Isak Gerson, spiritual leader of the Church of Kopimism. The Church of Kopimism is a religious organisation with roots from 2010. The organisation formalizes a community that's been well spread for a long time already. The community of kopimi requires no formal membership. You just have to feel a calling to worship what is the holiest of the holiest, information and copy. To do this, we organize kopyactings - religious services - where the kopimists share information with eachother through copying and remix. Copy and seed.

Since their webpage is slashdotted, here is the official press release from the Church of Kopimism: The Church of Kopimism is recognized by the state of Sweden Just before Christmas, the Swedish governmental agency Kammarkollegiet registered the Church of Kopimism as a religious organisation. This means that Sweden is the first country to recognize kopimism as a religion. The Church of Kopimism have tried to become registered as a religious organisation by Kammarkollegiet for more than a year. - Since Kammarkollegiet has been strict with formalities, we had to apply three times, a happy Gustav Nipe - board chairman for the organisation - says. He continues, I think it might have something to do with the governmental organisations abiding by a very copyright friendly attitude, with a twisted view on copying. For the Church of Kopimism, information is holy and copying is a sacrament. Information holds a value, in itself and in what it contains, and the value multiplies through copying. Therefore, copying is central for the organisation and its members. Being recognized by the state of Sweden is a large step for all of kopimi. Hopefully, this is one step towards the day when we can live out our faith without fear of persecution, says Isak Gerson, spiritual leader of the Church of Kopimism. The Church of Kopimism is a religious organisation with roots from 2010. The organisation formalizes a community that's been well spread for a long time already. The community of kopimi requires no formal membership. You just have to feel a calling to worship what is the holiest of the holiest, information and copy. To do this, we organize kopyactings - religious services - where the kopimists share information with eachother through copying and remix. Copy and seed.

I'm ashamed for being a Swede when this kind of bu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587630)

llshit news is what the rest of the world sees. Just let me say for damn sure that not *every* Swede is a smug thief.

Re:I'm ashamed for being a Swede when this kind of (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587656)

I know you have some nice outstanding citizens you could be proud of, like that Patrick Furstenhoff guy...

Re:I'm ashamed for being a Swede when this kind of (1)

Joikas (2545684) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587700)

That island shooter is Norwegian.

Re:I'm ashamed for being a Swede when this kind of (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587882)

Wait, wut?

What about the coreligionists? (1)

Xeranar (2029624) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587800)

I'm not sure how Sweden's freedom of religion works but here in the US there would atleast be a decade of legal battles to establish their church's fundamentals and then severe restrictions on how the file sharing would work since it would at best be legal between two coreligionists of this church but not amongst others. I find it intriguing that the new political tactic is to approach things using religion's exemption rules to try and create a gray area and call a law into question. It's effective but at what cost of alienating coreligionists who see this as a plain attack on their beliefs? Also, before the random "Christianity is fool of bigots" stuff, remember atleast 80% of the left-wing is still religious, it isn't a question of which wing you believe in, it's a question of belief and the use of it as a weapon against unjust laws...

Copimaximism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587846)

Join my even more holy religion, based on the sacred premise of not just copying information, but also copying the religion of someone that copies information!

Double sacred!

Kreatism (3, Insightful)

poity (465672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587892)

If only they'd get behind a religion of fervent creativity, production, and free dissemination of their collective work. This freeloader image they give off will hurt their cause more than help it.

Re:Kreatism (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588204)

Of course, the entire faith is built around entirely giving in to our animalistic urges.

Great idea (4, Interesting)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 2 years ago | (#38587902)

If a pyramid scheme can give itself a fancy name like Scientology and claim the status of religion and get the free pass that goes with it, why shouldn't file-sharers? If anything I hope this highlights the undue respect that is given to religion and the inappropriate treatment of "faith" as a virtue.

Religion and theft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38587972)

go hand in hand. No surprises here.

This is a fake group (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38588074)

This is a fake group setup to split support away from the pirate party. beware.

Great! (3, Funny)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588170)

now who do I pray to to get more seeders on my torrents?

Software Apocalypse (0)

Tyr07 (2300912) | more than 2 years ago | (#38588194)

A world where sharing online is always 100% legal....

It's a desolate world, much like what you see after a horrible nuclear war. A post apocalyptic environment. Rabbid programs scampering about, programmers scavenging what they can....

Dust bunnies roll by, where once large corporate software stood. Just wrecks instead of nice pretty towers, you have beaten, broken glass buildings falling over.

That's what happens when it all becomes legal.
Because corporations, stop making enough money. So they find a different way to make money, something other than software. Employee's no longer are employed as companies stop putting out money for developers.

Software development slows greatly. Less open source apps are made, because they can't make a living off of it, and the consumers that are starving reach and grasp at you demanding always more.

No...you promote hell you do. Sharing...in moderation, is a moderate world. Free sharing is internet anarchy.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?