Swedish Pirate Party Gains 3000 Members In 7 Hours 410
An anonymous reader writes "Due to outrage over the verdict in The Pirate Bay trial, the Swedish Pirate Party has gained 3000 members in less than 7 hours. It is now bigger than 3 of the 7 parties represented in the Swedish parliament. 'Ruling means that our political work must now be stepped up. We want to ensure that the Pirate Bay activities — to link people and information — is clearly lawful. And we want to do it for all people in Sweden, Europe and the world, continues Rick Falk Vinge. We want it to be open for ordinary people to disseminate and receive information without fear of imprisonment or astronomical damages.'"
Re:Are there any pirate party members in office? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:So what? (Score:3, Informative)
The number of voters will be more than the number of members. Far from everyone who votes for a party is a card carrying member.
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Informative)
You realize that they, like slashdot, are not responsible for what people post?
For better or worse (my vote) history suggests [slashdot.org] otherwise.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Informative)
That bunker [datacenterknowledge.com], that one of their ISP has may just come in handy.
Actually, that ISP is one of our best supporters and we have all of our Pirate Party servers in that bunker. ;-)
Daniel NystrÃm, Pirate Party Stockholm (Score:1, Informative)
Final count... 5000 new members today.
Re:Hold on a second. (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently not. Not if those works happen to inform you about other people who are offering copyrighted material.
All the works on their site were being shared legitimately. No copyright holders of any .torrent files were represented at the trial. They were not found guilty of actual copyright infringement.
Re:So what? (Score:2, Informative)
They gained 3000 members. Sounds like they're around the 18,000 member mark at the moment.
TFA: "A few minutes ago passed the Pirate Party membership People's Party 17 799 members."
EU Elections June7 (Score:5, Informative)
The elections for the European Parliament are on June 7.
That's what we're focusing all our efforts on right now. It's an entirely realistic goal, and we're planning to make it.
Vice Chairman Piratpartiet
Candidate for the European Parliament [wordpress.com]
Re:Arghhhh Cap'n (Score:5, Informative)
There is a pirate party in the US. http://www.pirate-party.us/ [pirate-party.us]
Re:Arghhhh Cap'n (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So what? (Score:5, Informative)
Sweden has 10 million peoeple - 3000 isn't that many. This is like saying "Alaska's secessionist party has 150 more people because Palin lost!" To play a real part in politics they'll need at least 10x as many people.
I'm sure the three parties with less members will love to hear they're utterly insignificant, being in parliament and all. How many third parties are in the US Congress? Senate? Oh, right. Also, the actual figure as of this moment is over 5000 new members today alone. Let me now give you Swedens biggest parties by current memberships compared to percentage in last election.
Socialdemokraterna (s) 100639 members - 2006 elections: 1,942,625 votes - 34.99% - 130 seats
Moderaterna (m) 54858 members - 2006 elections: 1,456,014 votes - 26.23% - 97 seats
Centern (c) 47866 members - 2006 elections: 437,389 votes - 7.88% - 29 seats
Kristdemokraterna (kd) 22919 members - 2006 elections: 365,998 votes - 6.59% - 24 seats
Piratpartiet (pp) 19693 members - 2006 elections: 34,918 votes - 0.63% - 0 seats
Folkpartiet (fp) 17799 members - 2006 elections: 418,395 votes - 7.54% - 28 seats
Vänsterpartiet (v) 10700 members - 2006 elections: 324,722 votes - 5.85% - 22 seats
Miljöpartiet (mp) 9110 members - 2006 elections: 291,121 votes - 5.24% - 19 seats
I think you can safely say the Pirate Party will do a lot better election next year than 2006. Also this year in June it's election for EU parliament, where they also stand very good chances now.
Oh yeah, and did you know what is now Swedens biggest youth party?
Ung Pirat (up) 9400
Moderata ungdomsförbundet (muf) 9153
Sveriges socialdemokratiska ungdomsförbund (ssu) 5431
That's right, "Young Pirate" now has more members than the youth organization of Moderaterna and Socialdemokraterna - Swedens biggest parties. Yeah, politically insignificant. Right.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know what universe you hail from, but most European countries are unarguably socialist to some degree and are doing pretty well for themselves. Have you confused socialism with Soviet-style communism?
Or perhaps you're just trolling and I've been caught.
Re:So what? (Score:3, Informative)
The stats from midnight (yes, it's just turned saturday here in Sweden) shows they now have 19693 members - a gain of 4868 members in 12 hours - almost 33%! That makes them the fifth largest party in Sweden, only 3226 members from number four - and almost 1/5 the size of the largest party (Socialdemokraterna) who has 100639 members. Adding to that, their youth organization is now the largest political youth group in Sweden with 9397 members ("Moderata ungdomsfÃrbundet" is second with 9153 members).
So what the numbers themselves are not that huge, but in relation to the numbers from the major parties - they become significant. Get the snowball rolling and the other parties might have to watch out.
It is starting to look like the conviction was the best thing that could have happened - a lot of people are upset and are doing what they can to change things!
Note: all numbers are from the pirate party webpage [piratpartiet.se]
Re:Difference with the US (Score:4, Informative)
He didn't say it was illegal. He said third parties never get anywhere. His statement is a mathematical fact because the US has a plurality system with no run-off. In that system, any vote for anyone other than the top two candidates does not impact the election. In other systems that is not the case. Hence, those systems are more open to third parties.
Re:Difference with the US (Score:5, Informative)
I am just pointing out a mathematical fact. In our winner take all system even if a third party got 20% of the vote in every state they would get 0 representation.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:3, Informative)
Well, all countries - even the US - are socialist "to some degree", as they have things such as welfare, and Government funded services such defence, education, transport and in some cases health.
But I wouldn't refer to European countries as socialist, anymore than I would say the US is a socialist country.
(Not that I agree with the OP in any way.)
Re:Difference with the US (Score:5, Informative)
FPTP is inherently flawed, and leads to people just voting for one of the two popular choices. In Sweden however, they use a system of proportional representation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Sweden#Seat_allocation [wikipedia.org]
There are many different voting systems, all with different advantages and disadvantage, and almost all of them are far superior to FPTP that is sadly used in most countries.
My pet theory on that is that people want a simple choice, one or the other. When you give them a complex choice, they get frustrated.
I don't know if that's true or not, but the problem is that FPTP voting is inherently flawed with more than two choices. It's got nothing to do with the mindset of the voter.
For example, if I ask what people's favourite music is, and the poll options and results are:
* Electronic music : 35%
* Heavy metal : 25%
* Death metal : 20%
* Thrash metal : 20%
Then under FPTP, electronic music wins. But clearly, people favour metal to electronic by 65% to 35%! The problem is that if there are multiple similar options, the vote gets split between them.
There are many other kinds of flaws that can occur in different systems - e.g., take a read of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system#Criteria_in_evaluating_single_winner_voting_systems [wikipedia.org] .
Re:Are there any pirate party members in office? (Score:4, Informative)
they managed to have a very good showing and were only a few members shy of getting government funds for advertising, etc.
Uhhh.. yeah.
They got 0.63% of the votes.
1,0% would have given them economic support for printing ballots
2,5% would have given them economic support for advertising
4,0% would have given them seats in parliament
They were young, they were small and while they did make a good splash they weren't even close. The current Pirate Party is a completely different beast in pretty much every sense possible.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Informative)
That's not quite accurate. If you comply with a DMCA takedown notice, it means you are protected from monetary damages, even if you put the work back up because of a counternotice provided by the user. If you do not comply with a DMCA takedown notice (e.g., if you are one of the countless service providers that has not designated an agent to receive a DMCA takedown notice [copyright.gov]), then you are no longer protected from monetary damages by the DMCA safe harbors. But, that doesn't mean that you are responsible for the user data either.
If there is no infringement, you are in the clear (unless you get sued but don't defend yourself). If there is infringement, then your liability could depend on factors such as whether you exercise control over what your site publishes, whether you had knowledge of the infringement, whether you promoted use of your site as a place for infringement, and whether you benefit as a result of the infringement.
Service providers did not want to face the uncertainty of whether the courts would find them liable for their users' content and what factors would affect the outcome of trial. I believe that they were the biggest supporters of the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA. The rights of users and the desire to avoid stiflement of free speech led to the counternotice-and-putback part of the safe harbor provisions (a provision sadly missing in the DMCA safe habor counterparts in parts of the world such as the European Union).
Unfortunately, the anonymous reader who posted Church of Scientology material (see grandparent comment) did so, well, anonymously. Thus, there was never an opportunity for a counternotice to be submitted by the user who posted the material. Perhaps someone could have claimed responsibility for having posted it and submitted a counternotice. But, that would mean providing a name, address, and telephone number, then consenting to the jurisdiction of U.S. Federal Courts.
Of course, Slashdot could have ignored the original notice and tried to face down a potential lawsuit from the Church of Scientology (not that I blame them for not wanting to go through that). But, Slashdot would have faced such as threat regardless of the DMCA safe habor provisions. At least the DMCA safe habor provisions meant that there was no need for Slashdot people (or scripts) to scan comments for potentially instances of infringement. And the DMCA counternotice-and-putback provision provided an opportunity for someone else to take on the monetary risks of possible infringement.
If Slashdot did not take advantage of the DMCA safe habor, or if there were no DMCA safe habors, that would not meant that Slashdot would be liable in court. It would just mean that Slashdot would have one affirmative defense fewer to hide behind and that the question of responsibility would be an open one for the courts to decide.
Re:Here is the theme... (Score:3, Informative)
What a dumb signature...
Another /. signature addresses your first silly point: atheism is a religion in the same way as not collecting stamps is a hobby.
interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Informative)
However while DMCA does handle one side of the equation it does not handle the wrongful use of DMCA notices taking down stuff that is legal. There are no anti-DMCA notices.
But there are - that's the whole point of DMCA take-down process! Here's how it works:
User X publishes some material using service provider P. Company Y sends P a DMCA take-down notice, claiming the ownership of said material. At this point P must take the materials down, or accept responsibility for copyright infringement (if Y can later prove in court that the material was indeed infringing).
You assume that it stops here, but in practice, it doesn't. Here's what follows.
When P takes down the materials, it notifies X. X can now in turn claim that claims put forward by Y are themselves wrong - and at that point P can put the content back online, without assuming responsibility (it now fully rests with X). Note, this is precisely your "anti-DMCA notice". If Y is willing to stick to their claim, they sue X, and then the court figures out who's wrong and who's right; if the court finds out that the material was indeed infringing, then P finally takes down the material for good, and X (but not P) pays out the damages to Y.
The reason why counterclaims are very rare in practice is because 1) most material removed under DMCA take-down notices is, indeed, infringing, and the poster knows it very well, so they don't challenge it, and 2) in remaining cases, if people are uncertain about the status, they are often afraid and/or don't have the money to go to court. #1 needs no further elaboration, while #2 is a deficiency with the American justice system in general, not with DMCA.
Aside from that, it's actually a very reasonable process that results in minimal headache for the service providers, gives content owners a quick way to remove content which is clearly illegal without going to the court for each and every case, and yet allows content posters to defend their rights in the court if they believe they are in the right.
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Informative)
You may want to look into DMCA counter-notices [wikipedia.org].
Re:Wow.... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:interesting (Score:3, Informative)
Re:EU Elections June7 (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So what? (Score:2, Informative)
I thought this was an interesting question so I looked up. The number of members in 2006 was 9154 (source: http://forum.piratpartiet.se/FindPost138694.aspx [piratpartiet.se] (In Swedish I'm afraid)
Sverigedemokraterna 3627 members (April 2009) 162,463 votes - 2,93%
Feministiskt Initiativ 1700 members (December 2006) 37954 votes - 0,68%
Those two are the only parties that got more votes than the pirate party that didn't make into the Riksdag. It would seem that the membership count in pp has doubled since the election.
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Informative)
Micro howto for signing up in the swedish Piratpartiet:
1. Go to piratpartiet.se
2. Sign up as a member
3. Done.
So, they are definitly not "paying supporters", and most probably won't lift a finger for "The Cause" (???). I'd probably guess that most are 18yrs, so they can't even vote in the upcoming election for the EU parlament.