Would you vote for an Irish 'Pirate Party'?

General Zod

gizmo wrote: »

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.

In fairness, we have a political party called The Soldiers of Destiny. People who ignore a party's policies because of their name are being ignorant.

Collie D

General Zod wrote: »

In fairness, we have a political party called The Soldiers of Destiny. People who ignore a party's policies because of their name are being ignorant.

Tell that to the Monster Raving Loony Party

General Zod

Everyone knows that the Monster Raving Looney Party were an elaborate joke, but still an integral part of the election process. Everyone knew what their policies were. The Pirate Party in Sweden ran with a distinct platform which got them voted in. regardless of their name other parties are now going to have to deal with them and adress the reasons they got voted in for.

Edited to add: If I formed a party with the policy that everyone must build a secret dungeon and imprison family members in it, called my party Fritzl Faíl and got elected, people would have to ignore my party name and adress my policies because I have a mandate.

Piste

As someone who wants to make a living out of intellectual property I couldn't vote for these people. Not only are their views on copyright wildly idealistic, they're a one-issue party. We all know how are own one-issue party (greens) got on when they were elected.

Collie D

General Zod wrote: »

regardless of their name other parties are now going to have to deal with them and adress the reasons they got voted in for.

Piste wrote: »

Not only are their views on copyright wildly idealistic, they're a one-issue party.

As Piste says they're a one issue party, the other MPS can ignore them. I've already posted that there 101 more important things to get politlcally active about.

gizmo

You seem to be missing the point regarding my comments on their name. The question is not whether people laugh at the whole "pirate" thing but whether their peers take their push for realistic reforms seriously when they're very name suggests they just want to take whatever is out there for free.

General Zod

single issue or not, it was important enough for enough people to get out there and vote for them. the Euro's are a start. They can use this for the next Swedish elections.

General Zod

gizmo wrote: »

You seem to be missing the point regarding my comments on their name. The question is not whether people laugh at the whole "pirate" thing but whether their peers take their push for realistic reforms seriously when they're very name suggests they just want to take whatever is out there for free.

For free or not, Downloading music was legal in Sweden. The Swedish government bowed down to a private interest body from another country to change a legal priviledge. If the elected officials weren't working hard enough to protect the interests of their constituents, then it is up to the constituents to elect officials who will.

Which is exactly what happened. Democracy in action.

Nick_oliveri

Cut out the middleman. Distribution of physical media is slowly being replaced by the internets IMO. I would be all for a "downloading" tax btw.
Im reminded of an episode of south park.

Lars (Ulrich) wants to have a gold-plated shark tank bar installed next to his pool, but must now wait a few months, and Britney does not have the sufficient funds to keep a Gulfstream IV (private jet), so she replaces it with a smaller Gulfstream III, which doesn't have a remote control for its surround sound DVD system.

Is it about the money or the music? I must read up about this party.

Lennoxschips

I voted for them anyway. I figure at least with one-issue parties not interested in government you know what you're getting. And patent and copyright reform (particularly where medicines are concerned, which Piratpartiet also is vocal about) is a good idea.

The Irish Green Party taught me never to vote for a party with aspirations for government. More than anything else, I was against the M3 and co-location. What did the Greens give us... exactly that. So in my opinion, these one issue parties are the wave of the future. Surely they're not going to compromise on the one issue they represent.

Nick_oliveri

Lennoxschips wrote: »

And patent and copyright reform (particularly where medicines are concerned, which Piratpartiet also is vocal about) is a good idea.

+1
TBH, I think monopolizing healthcare is one of the lowest forms of corporate greed.

So in my opinion, these one issue parties are the wave of the future. Surely they're not going to compromise on the one issue they represent.

Thats the thing about parties that represent or pander to a set of specific values or morals, it eventually becomes a two horse race like here or in America. Under the guise of a democracy and "change", not much progress is to be made.

Candidates can promise whatever they want, but we dont hold them to their promises, they dont have a legal obligation to fulfill these promises, and therein lies the problem.

Although, in saying that, im sure that this party will push this issue. But its just like the boy racer party getting two seats in europe and pushing reform on decibal laws or speedramps or something. Not that boy racers are comparable to pirates, but you see where im coming from.. right?

Lennoxschips

In terms of Europe they don't have much influence no, but this a first step. If they reproduce 7% at the the Swedish general election (which they look like they might do) then they'll have 25 seats in the Swedish parliament. And it seems that other countries might follow suit and set up their own "Piratpartiet".

jacool

I'm voting NO
There's an assumption here that all the people in the music industry are loaded and that its OK to to rip them off. Plainly not true. I know people who are struggling to get by and they will suffer too.
Says a lot about people who just want something for nothing, but can make excuses for their actions.

Stev_o

This is why politics is failing in Europe, how about they address real problems like eh i dunno global recession mass unemployment? Plus when was the last time any of you have been approached by Gardai over downloading illegal material? Not a issue that applies to us so why should we vote something that we don't need to address?

The_Minister

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

+1
TBH, I think monopolizing healthcare is one of the lowest forms of corporate greed.

And the 100's of billions that are spent on developing new drugs should be recouped how?

They get approx 7 years to recoup their expenditure, then then generics can be made.

How will new drugs get researched if every formula goes into the public domain immediately?
And how expensive will drugs become if costs and profit must be jammed into an even smaller time period.

Nick_oliveri

I did mean monopolizing it to a state where a cancer victim cant afford to pay for his or her treatment. A lot of people cannot afford various treatments all over the world, not just in underdeveloped countries.

Theres making a buck and theres pulling the piss.

The_Minister

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

I did mean monopolizing it to a state where a cancer victim cant afford to pay for his or her treatment. A lot of people cannot afford various treatments all over the world, not just in underdeveloped countries.

Theres making a buck and theres pulling the piss.

And what's your alternative?
They have to make back the money and turn a profit in only seven years.
Of course costs are going to be high.

ShooterSF

The_Minister wrote: »

And what's your alternative?
They have to make back the money and turn a profit in only seven years.
Of course costs are going to be high.

I'm still reading up on this but the concept is that the EU would setup an R&D department financed by the governments who would pay for the development. Then in return they could allow the lowest bidder to make the drugs for their respective National health organisations.
The concept being the savings would be made at that point by being able to purchase cheap drugs.

SLUSK

4 guys behind thepiratebay.org got jail sentences and also roughly 2.8 million euro fine or whatever you call it that they are supposed to pay to the copyright guys.

This verdict has off course been appealed. Funny thing is not one single kb of copyrighted material is to be found on their servers because of the way the bit-torrent works. Still they got sentenced for "aiding in copyright infringments".

You might as well bring google to trial under these circumstances.

No wonder people vote for the pirate party, another thing is that we no longer have any privacy left in Sweden because two different laws that came in motion, one law we call FRA is that they basicly monitor all traffic to foreign countries via internet or mobile phone networks. Number two is IPRED, this gives private companies right to get personal info about people from the ISP when there is a suspected copy right infringement. The ruling party in Sweden said they would not turn an entire generation of people into criminals, but that is exactly what they did. Alot of angry young men will vote for the Pirate party in next years parliamentary election in Sweden.

Thinking about how my country is run at the moment makes me sick, I truly hate the country I was born in.

Roomic Cube

I would vote for Pirate Party Ireland, and I'm glad to see the ball is rolling

of course I'd have to agree with their other policies outside of copyright etc

speedboatchase

I wouldn't. Piracy is wrong

General Zod

jacool wrote: »

I'm voting NO
There's an assumption here that all the people in the music industry are loaded and that its OK to to rip them off. Plainly not true. I know people who are struggling to get by and they will suffer too.
Says a lot about people who just want something for nothing, but can make excuses for their actions.

There's an assumption that the industry bodies who are financing this push against torrenting are only doing so to retain their own control over distribution at artificially inflated prices to fill their own pockets. They don't actually care about the smaller players in the music industry, the ones who always had to innovate in order to stay afloat.

The most popular downloaded (torrented) songs also happen to be the most bought songs also. Even without downloading the smaller industry figures would be in the same boat trying hard just to break even, that wouldn't change.

gizmo

See I'd say exactly the opposite of this. With so many representatives from different nations and backgrounds many decisions are made using something akin to block voting. Now consider this, Party A approach your Pirate Party representative and say that they will support the PP when it comes to their motions being put forward if they in turn support Party A's proposal. The PP have no stance on said issue and thus agree to Party A's proposal in order to gain more support for their own interests. So what happens if you disagree with Party A's stance on the issue? You've elected an official from a party with no stance on the issue thus you have no idea what you're getting. They're not doing anything wrong technically though and at least they're closer to getting more rights for pirates out there so hey, the ends justify the means right?

SLUSK the Pirate Bay Trial was covered extensively in another thread in this forum so I'd suggest you pop over there if you want to discuss it. For what it's worth though, if you know how BT works then you'll know that comparisons with Google are idiotic. Google do not run a tracker, are aware of exactly what their services are designed and used for and don't flaunt any potential law breaking using a highly provocative legal section on their site in any case. TPB on the other hand did all of the above so in actual fact "aiding in copyright infringements" is exactly what they did.

I don't mean this as a personal insult ShooterSF but you seem pretty gun-ho about supporting the PP over here yet from your posts it seems that you're still not sure what their proposals and polices really entail, do you think that's wise?

While that may be true General Zod it still doesn't justify stealing music from any artist whether they are popular or not. People have been making a big song and dance about the importance of online exposure via the net for the last few years. Wasn't it the Arctic Monkies who became famous due to their popularity on MySpace? What good is all movement away from a reliance on the big labels when people still go out and download their material?

The crux of the issue here is the bundling of the objectives of copyright reform and privacy into one party. While I am all for the protection of our right to privacy in most areas I do not and will not support the legalisation of piracy. The mere idea of it is utter lunacy and if it continues to be tied to the same party as the one fighting over privacy concerns then it will ultimately be doomed to failure imo.

ShooterSF

gizmo wrote: »

I don't mean this as a personal insult ShooterSF but you seem pretty gun-ho about supporting the PP over here yet from your posts it seems that you're still not sure what their proposals and polices really entail, do you think that's wise?

None taken. My view is that I support the ideals and am still working through the potential realities. I feel the Irish party has the potential to establish it's own goals and priorities and is not a simple extension of the Swedish one. I feel that the best chance of this happening is to get as many people interested to sign up and join in the organisation's construction. The more input it gets at start up will give it the best chance of forming the best version of the party possible. It's a lot hard to change it later. The party like many start-ups can go so many ways but it deserves a shot and with the current parties in this country it has a good chance to be an improvement on them.

Eoin

gizmo, you make many good points. It's interesting to see how people justify this to themselves. I do the same to some degree - I have no problem with downloading TV shows, because it takes so damn long for them to be shown over here, if at all.

I just can't figure out why the industries won't react properly to the market. The list price for a hardback version of a new release on Waterstones is £18.99 (which I already find too high). The eBook version is £18.58.

With discounts, the hardback version is actually less than the eBook version. That's just crazy. I would happily pay around €5-6 for a recently released album or book in digital format. Anything more than that is too much.

To get back on topic - no, I wouldn't vote for a party like this, any more than I would vote for a "drink-driving-is-OK-for-people-in-rural-locations" party.

Nick_oliveri

eoin wrote: »

To get back on topic - no, I wouldn't vote for a party like this, any more than I would vote for a "drink-driving-is-OK-for-people-in-rural-locations" party.

Not the fairest comparison really is it?

Eoin

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Not the fairest comparison really is it?

Perhaps not. I'm just making the comparison between two illegal acts that some people think are OK to commit based on factors that they have decided.

What I remember from cassette and VHS recordings was that you first needed to find someone with a recording in the first place, and then you got a copy that didn't have the same quality. As each copy gets recorded you lose more quality. With internet downloads, you don't lose any/much quality from the original version as more copies are distributed. Plus the sheer volume and easy accessability of the downloads puts them in a different league in my opinion. Do people really think that torrent sites are no different to Google?

As I said, I have major problems with the business model - pricing music and eBooks at similar prices to physical versions makes no sense to me and I think they are their own worst enemy in this regard. Edit: There are people who will never pay for music downloads and see nothing wrong with that. There are also people who would pay if the prices were reasonable. I think the music industry would be able to hold the moral highground with more authority if their prices were more reasonable.

I wouldn't vote for them primarily because I think there are far more pressing issues to be dealt with. A limit of 5 years copyright seems grossly unfair to the artist.

SLUSK

Well google can be used just as easily to find copyrighted material like the pirate bay. So who we throw in jail for aiding in copyright infringment is basicly arbitrary. In Denmark they have taken ISPs to court for refusing to block the pirate bay website.

gizmo

You didn't read my post at all did you SLUSK? Or maybe you are simply unfamiliar with how bittorrent works. I'll give you a simple analogy, I can hop on a bus and travel into a dodgy part of town where I know I'll be able to find a drug dealer. Now, does that mean the bus is aiding in the sale of drugs? Of course not. However, the drug dealer is the one who actually has the drugs and can supply them. Is he aiding in the sale of drugs? Of course.

Basically, sure you can find torrent files using Google but without the trackers which are run by sites such as TPB you couldn't do anything with them.

If that isn't clear then just read up on the subject on wikipedia - the tracker coordinates the file distribution. These files are illegal, TPB knew about it, welcomed it, encouraged it and developed a service which made it easier to do share them. Thus, as I said above they were completely guilty of aiding in copyright infringement.

SLUSK

Yes they were "aiding" in the distribution of copyrighted software, which google also does. I can find any torrent I like on google. The ISPs are also "aiding" in piracy, if we all were on dialup there would not be so much piracy. If people did not resort to piracy there would be no need for 100mbit internet like alot of city dwellers in Sweden have. They came after a small player like thepiratebay because they knew they could get the verdict they wanted, they could not go after google in the same way.