Would you vote for an Irish 'Pirate Party'?

Black Swan

If I vote yes, do I get free cruises to the Caribbean?

Morlar

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If I vote yes, do I get free cruises to the Caribbean?

Is an extended one to the Somali coast good enough ?

javaboy

Morlar wrote: »

I wonder what they will use their €300,000 per year in expenses on ?

http://www.edwardmoorelive.com/create-software/stack-blank-dvd.jpg

phasers

javaboy wrote: »

http://www.edwardmoorelive.com/create-software/stack-blank-dvd.jpg

get with it Grandpa

pffft

gizmo

I'd have serious reservations over the mental health of anyone who believes that the decriminalization of file sharing, be it for personal use or otherwise, wouldn't have an extremely negative effect on the production of media as we know it. Since this is one of the principle aims of the party then there's not a chance in hell I'd vote for them at all.

While I do believe that current distribution methods need to be overhauled to reflect these more modern times I do not, under any circumstances, believe we need a party made up of a bunch of whack jobs representing people in Europe in order to bring it about.

Morlar

javaboy wrote: »

http://www.edwardmoorelive.com/create-software/stack-blank-dvd.jpg

Na, pirate file-sharing satellites are the way forward ARRRRRR.

Black Swan

Morlar wrote: »

Is an extended one to the Somali coast good enough ?

No Jamaican rum!

Terry

gizmo wrote: »

I'd have serious reservations over the mental health of anyone who believes that the decriminalization of file sharing, be it for personal use or otherwise, wouldn't have an extremely negative effect on the production of media as we know it. Since this is one of the principle aims of the party then there's not a chance in hell I'd vote for them at all.

While I do believe that current distribution methods need to be overhauled to reflect these more modern times I do not, under any circumstances, believe we need a party made up of a bunch of whack jobs representing people in Europe in order to bring it about.

Yeah, but I saw a Disney film and it made out that pirates are cool.
Surely a company founded by a nazi wouldn't lie to me.

Morlar

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

No Jamaican rum!

Will you really need rum when you are praying 5 times a day ? Whats wrong with good old fashioned Kat and ak47's ?

Smart Bug

Isn't this mad? We're voting about voting. Wow, really blows my wiggins.

Boggle

I'd have serious reservations over the mental health of anyone who believes that the decriminalization of file sharing, be it for personal use or otherwise, wouldn't have an extremely negative effect on the production of media as we know it. Since this is one of the principle aims of the party then there's not a chance in hell I'd vote for them at all.

While I do believe that current distribution methods need to be overhauled to reflect these more modern times I do not, under any circumstances, believe we need a party made up of a bunch of whack jobs representing people in Europe in order to bring it about.

Before I started downloading I had one dvd. Since I started, I now see any film that takes my interest for free and for some reason still elect to buy the good ones.
There's plenty of money in people like me to fund decent films - the only difference is that the level of profits (for all) is less.
But then its all about profits innit?!?

Also, I have serious issues with the retention of my browsing and email history - its none of their business and the fact that they (arguably I might add) lose some money does not override my right to privacy... so why not give them a vote?

gizmo

Terry wrote: »

Yeah, but I saw a Disney film and it made out that pirates are cool.
Surely a company founded by a nazi wouldn't lie to me.

Walt Disney may have been many things but accusations of him being a Nazi clearly belong over here.

Also, for arguments sake lets say he was, does that mean it's ok to steal from the company he founded?

Boggle wrote: »

Before I started downloading I had one dvd. Since I started, I now see any film that takes my interest for free and for some reason still elect to buy the good ones.
There's plenty of money in people like me to fund decent films - the only difference is that the level of profits (for all) is less.
But then its all about profits innit?!?

So you're saying it's alright to watch anything you want for free and only buy the stuff you like? Given the extremely subjective nature of what makes a good film that rationalization is pretty hard to justify in the real world to be honest.

Boggle wrote: »

Also, I have serious issues with the retention of my browsing and email history - its none of their business and the fact that they (arguably I might add) lose some money does not override my right to privacy... so why not give them a vote?

As do I, but just because they have one policy you support doesn't mean you should ignore their other policies which are clearly bat**** crazy. For instance, under Hitler Germany saw huge improvements in both their economy and infrastructure, good for him! Pity about that whole war thing though right?

ShooterSF

gizmo wrote: »

I'd have serious reservations over the mental health of anyone who believes that the decriminalization of file sharing, be it for personal use or otherwise, wouldn't have an extremely negative effect on the production of media as we know it. Since this is one of the principle aims of the party then there's not a chance in hell I'd vote for them at all.

While I do believe that current distribution methods need to be overhauled to reflect these more modern times I do not, under any circumstances, believe we need a party made up of a bunch of whack jobs representing people in Europe in order to bring it about.

While my views might be a touch more moderate that the policies at hand given the PP's policy or the current setup I know which I prefer and to be honest which one is actually the real life situation at the minute. Films still have the cinema, music still has concerts. My concern would be more for the gaming industry which born out of computers may have a bigger problem.

If your fear is of whackos then I suggest that if a time comes that the PPI could put forward a candidate in your area that you can judge that person then.
To be fair it's unlikely the party would ever be mainstream and would serve more as a pressure group on the current mainstream parties to discuss the issues of copyright law or risk loosing more seats to such a party.

Oh crap this is AH, so to finish my point YARRRRR! Where be the white wenches at?

thelordofcheese

Boggle wrote: »

Also, I have serious issues with the retention of my browsing and email history - its none of their business and the fact that they (arguably I might add) lose some money does not override my right to privacy

Wat?

Boggle

eircom have to do this afaik

Jazzy

yeah definately.
the more i rob from the entertainment industry the happier i am.
heck, beats the BNP anyway

M5

The situation in Sweden is completely different. They have politicised it so much because they are coming under pressure from the American government (and the MpAA) to change their laws. Google the movie "steal this film" quite a bit of info on the situation there.

gizmo

ShooterSF wrote: »

To be fair it's unlikely the party would ever be mainstream and would serve more as a pressure group on the current mainstream parties to discuss the issues of copyright law or risk loosing more seats to such a party.

See now we're getting somewhere. While I have no problem with pressure groups being organised to affect some level of change in the current setup I really don't think they belong in the political realm. Things are still changing for the better in terms of alternative to the current distribution models, all without this kind of intervention. One need only look at the dropping of DRM from iTunes, the availability of DRM-free tracks from Amazon, affordable online rentals from Netflix and excellent services such as Spotify for examples of these. Sure they're coming in and being adopted slowly but with industries this big change, while being inevitable, will unfortuantely be slow.

General Zod

Video Taping, Casette taping and bootlegging live concerts didn't kill the music or film industry. The only thing piracy will kill is the outdated music industry model.

the MPAA has a very well funded lobbying section which they are using to protect their profits, not the copyright of their artists.

When major record labels start to embrace new medium distribution and realise that trying to influence laws (and outright circumvent them in some cases to suit their own needs) will only encourage piracy, then I'll have more respect for their position.

General Zod

gizmo wrote: »

See now we're getting somewhere. While I have no problem with pressure groups being organised to affect some level of change in the current setup I really don't think they belong in the political realm. Things are still changing for the better in terms of alternative to the current distribution models, all without this kind of intervention. One need only look at the dropping of DRM from iTunes, the availability of DRM-free tracks from Amazon, affordable online rentals from Netflix and excellent services such as Spotify for examples of these. Sure they're coming in and being adopted slowly but with industries this big change, while being inevitable, will unfortuantely be slow.

This is a situation where a pressure group really has to enter the politcal arena.

The major players (EMI etc) are using their own pressure groups to force changes in the law in sweden (and they tried in Ireland also). If they want to start playing politics it's only fair that other pressure groups set up to fight against the changes enter the political arena to create a level playing field.

Change is only slow in the record industry because they are slowing it themselves to set the system up to suit themselves first. The only reason DRM was dropped (in your examples) was because of the outcry against it.

ShooterSF

gizmo wrote: »

See now we're getting somewhere. While I have no problem with pressure groups being organised to affect some level of change in the current setup I really don't think they belong in the political realm. Things are still changing for the better in terms of alternative to the current distribution models, all without this kind of intervention. One need only look at the dropping of DRM from iTunes, the availability of DRM-free tracks from Amazon, affordable online rentals from Netflix and excellent services such as Spotify for examples of these. Sure they're coming in and being adopted slowly but with industries this big change, while being inevitable, will unfortuantely be slow.

I'm not keen on pressure groups for the sake of pressure groups though. And while I think the industry is moving in the right way, too slowly, laws have to change too. The difference in a standard pressure group and a party is a party can prove it has public support whereas a pressure group tends to be more likely to acquire the whack jobs you discussed earlier. It's a transparency issue for me.
Also the swedish party's views on data protection online are another I am keen on and would like to see a firm stance on net neutrality represented too.

To be honest I'm only getting into this and hadn't even heard of the party last week. I agree with the core of their principles and feel others do too. The Irish party is still very much up in the air from what I have seen so far.

I also strongly believe there is a need for different parties in this country beyond the current set.

M5

For a company (effectively) to try to force a country to change its laws to suit its business is completely unacceptable IMHO.

They have tried to bully Sweden to change their laws. I'm delighted that someone is standing up to them as too many countries have folded. I believe that sanctions were threatened at some stage too

My name is URL

M5 wrote: »

For a company (effectively) to try to force a country to change its laws to suit its business is completely unacceptable IMHO.

They have tried to bully Sweden to change their laws. I'm delighted that someone is standing up to them as too many countries have folded. I believe that sanctions were threatened at some stage too

It isn't effectively a 'company' it's an entire industry on which many other industries rely heavily.

If it was an oil-related problem there'd be sanctions to protect that industry

M5

My name is URL wrote: »

It isn't effectively a 'company' it's an entire industry on which many other industries rely heavily.

If it was an oil-related problem there'd be sanctions to protect that industry

Its a lobby group who lobby on behalf of a monopoly (in reality)

Can you imagine BP demanding that the EU place sanctions on the US because they sell petrol at 1/4 the price over there...

gizmo

Video and cassette taping never hurt the industry because one person couldn't distribute their single copy to hundreds of people who could then distribute to hundreds more. This huge difference in scale makes the comparison moot in my opinion.

Yes DRM was dropped due to the public outcry, not by a political party with an extremely limited set of objectives taking up valuable seats in the EU. Also, why wouldn't they be slow in adopting these new technologies? The entertainment industry is a massive one which employs hundreds of thousands across the world and is worth billions, of course they're going to be careful with how they adopt new distribution methods.

You are right though ShooterSF, the laws do need to change but this reminds me of a comment made by another poster back when the Pirate Bay verdicts were returned.

If there's gonna be any middle ground reached in relation to downloading stuff, we should not side with a group that is not prepared to find that middle ground.

Now, while many would argue that the music industry is the group being referenced here, I would argue that the likes of The Pirate Party are no better in their level of disinterest in finding a middle ground. It is for this reason that I support neither their existence as a political party nor their recent success in Sweden, not to mention the idea of a similar movement forming here.

RHRN

gizmo wrote: »

I would argue that the likes of The Pirate Party are no better in their level of disinterest in finding a middle ground.

From their website:

The monopoly for the copyright holder to exploit an aesthetic work commercially should be limited to five years after publication.

If they were so apathetic about finding a middle ground, they'd be completely "STOP ALL COPYRIGHTS NOW!!!" Wouldn't they? They realise that no-copyright, AT ALL, won't work.

They want reform, not abolition.

ShooterSF

Gizmo, you bring up some good points. I'll say it now if I become a member of a political party and the attitude becomes "It's this or nothing" I'll walk. I'm a realist not an idealist. All I would hope of a pirate party is to help speed up the change in the right way.
I'm not sure what way the Swedish outfit is run but I'd hope the Irish wouldn't be a group of hardliners.
Anywho this AH and not really suitable for proper discussion

gizmo

I'm not sure RHRN, first of all I'd hardly call enforcing a 5 year limitation on copyrights to be a middle ground, more complete and utter fantasy. What gives us the right to dictate how long copyright holders get to hold onto the rights to something they made? While I need to give the reforms issue more thought myself, the term that immediately comes to mind when I think middle ground is the lifetime of the creator of the product.

As for wanting reform and not abolition, this is the sentence which worries me the most.

All non-commercial copying and use should be completely free.

This, of course, simply relates to piracy in general. Why should you get this material for free, even if it's for "personal use"?

As for their polices on patents, while I'm not familiar with the specifics of the system in place, I am aware of some of the hilarious applications which have been approved over the years. In light of those, I'd be happy too see the system overhauled but again, it seems The Pirate Party's overall goal is to abolish the patent system entirely. The example they use is the Pharmaceutical industry however they make mention of others later in their manifesto. Their alternative, however, seems quite naive and way beyond the remit of such a party.

And so, bringing all of that together you have..

The Pirate Party wants to fundamentally reform copyright law, get rid of the patent system, and ensure that citizens' rights to privacy are respected. With this agenda, and only this, we are making a bid for representation in the European and Swedish parliaments.

So what happens when they're called to vote on something not regarding the above issues? Do they abstain? Do they just vote as part of some other block, not considering the desires of those who elected them? Personally I'd prefer a more rounded party and/or individual representing me in Europe.

And on a final note, calling itself The Pirate Party will ensure they are never taken seriously by their either their peers or the general public and will, in fact, more than likely damage any chances they have at affect worthwhile reform.

Collie D

No, would be more concerned with health, crime, economy, taxes, poverty, environment and about a hundred other things ahead of whether somebody can download music for free.

General Zod

gizmo wrote: »

Video and cassette taping never hurt the industry because one person couldn't distribute their single copy to hundreds of people who could then distribute to hundreds more. This huge difference in scale makes the comparison moot in my opinion.

It was deemed a significant enough threat that a levy was placed on the sale of blank Cassettes and tapes at the behest of the Music industry. IMO the Industry would accept a levy being placed on broadband to compensate for file sharing. Which would show that they don't give a crap about artist copyright as long as the money keeps rolling into their coffers.