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.'"
Wow.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. I honestly didn't think TPB broke any swedish laws. The name is cute but the site doesn't favor pirated content over legal content. I don't get it.
nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Insightful)
so what we have here is a possibility that in the future a 'pirate' party controls the government maybe? Would Obama with his RIAA lawyer friends declare Sweden to be part of axis of evil and will actually bomb them to bring in the democracy US style (where only 2 parties are really allowed to hold the government in practice).
That bunker [datacenterknowledge.com], that one of their ISP has may just come in handy.
Are there any pirate party members in office? (Score:4, Insightful)
A political party is worthless if it doesn't have any card-carrying members in office legislating, judiciating or executing... (that doesn't quite sound right, but okay... you get the idea)
When is the next election cycle? THAT is when things really get shaken up.
Here we go again... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Are there any pirate party members in office? (Score:3, Insightful)
A political party is worthless if it doesn't have any card-carrying members in office
Look at the Canadian Green party.
Swedish Pirate Party (Score:4, Insightful)
This is taken from the automaticly translated article.
If these guys are genuine that may be something. By genuine I mean fight intellectual property nonsense, not nut jobs who believe that it is ok to just take others work. They don't sound genuine, however.
I said this before but I say it again. I think business is good in general, a chronic lack of wealth has a negative effect on sociality. However large corporations (I believe this started in the eighties) now think that to protect their profits they must control a market. This is done through laws that where instituted by means of lobbying, or the extension of laws to areas where they were never meant for. Its OK if there are three or so other big players, then you cant be called a monopoly and be broken up. These people (like banks) have a short term view of things and can harm the competitiveness of the western world.
You can see this in music, with fees for sampling music. There even a role over rate involved so if an artist has success they pay more for the samples per song, which consumes most of your profit. (the four) Big companies in music are the ones who profit while every one pays out. IP also plays a apart in IT as well, with the added negative (from our view) that companies don't even have to have a strong case, you cant afford 5 million in court fees so you must settle
So what? (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
More importantly, this case is giving the issue a lot of renewed attention. I'm happy about that.
Re:I suggest (Score:3, Insightful)
I suggest creating a facebook group and tying a coloured ribbon around the antennae of your car. This is what we do in Canada.
Modded insightful? No offense, but how is this insightful? I find it more humorous or ironic than Insightful.
Not saying it shouldn't be modded up, just the "insightful part".
Re:The Thief Party (Score:5, Insightful)
So it is just fine that copyright, the agreement between "the people" and the creators (actually, the publishers who buy up the content for exclusive distribution and control), has been abused and distorted to the point that works that would be public domain have how completely fallen off the face of the earth? The notion of copyright has been completely twisted to become a control on all entertainment. That was NOT its intent. "The people" were not represented when these changes were imposed and "the people" will have to take it back. In the mean time, civil disobedience is what we are doing -- taking freely as we please in spite of bad law.
It's not stealing. That's why they use the word "infringement." Stealing is depriving others of their property. That isn't what is happening.
Difference with the US (Score:5, Insightful)
It's interesting the difference with the US. "Kids" in Sweden are engaging properly in the political process, forming a party and making (real) change happen. Rather than just rolling over and accepting the situation with "nothing we can do" and "who can we vote for, they're all the same".
Rich.
Re:The Thief Party (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you pay Time-Warner when you sing "Happy Birthday to you" in public,
or do you steal/pirate it?
Shame on you.
Re:Wow.... (Score:4, Insightful)
You realize that they, like slashdot, are not responsible for what people post?
At least in the sense that they let you post anything, much like slashdot.
Re:Difference with the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps because the Swedes have a system that allows for multiple parties?
Our system insures third parties never get anywhere.
"Linking People to Information?" (Score:4, Insightful)
And that information wants to be "Free," I suppose...?
That's fine. Of course, if all TPB was "link people to information," they would not be in this mess. What they did, was link people to *entertainment*, which I understand wants to be paid for, more times than not.
Mod parent up (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:So what? (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually 4000 now. ;)
They have more members than the Liberal People's Party which got 7.54% of the votes in the last elections giving them 28 seats. That means that unless the Pirate Party loses a lot of support before the election (and it currently appears to be gaining more support for the moment), they will probably get seats in Parliament.
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as the DMCA sucks, I don't agree with your comment.
Slashdot wasn't responsible for what the commenter posted, otherwise the CoS would have been able to sue slashdot and win, regardless of whether the comment was taken down or not.
The fact that you have to comply with a DMCA takedown doesn't mean that you're responsible for the comment.
It means you're responsible for the comment, only if you ignore the takedown notice.
In practice, the comment is gone either way, so it doesn't make much difference to freedom of speech, but you aren't legally (read: financially) responsible.
Re:Mod parent up (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Difference with the US (Score:3, Insightful)
Our system insures third parties never get anywhere.
I wasn't aware that voting for a third party in the US was illegal ... Oh wait, it isn't illegal. You're just enunciating the "nothing we can do" argument.
Rich.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, here in Australia the Greens have several seats in the Senate, enough in fact, that the Government can't pass legislation without their support (assuming they don't have the support of the opposition). This usually isn't a problem, as the Greens will generally go along with most of the government legislation. But, for certain pieces, for example, the government is forced to make concessions to appease the Greens if they wish to get the legislation through.
The point being, if you need the support of a party in order to get more controversial legislation through, you may well find you need to make concessions to other parties in areas that aren't core to your political ideology in order to advance your main cause. I suspect this is what The Pirate Party would like to achieve. No real aspirations for government, just enough representation to change the law in the areas they really care about.
Re:"Knowledge"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"Linking People to Information?" (Score:1, Insightful)
TPB hosted torrent files, which are essentially instructions on how to download something (games, movies, and music being the most common on their site presumably).
Should it be breaking the law for me to tell you how to commit a crime? Go to a gun store, buy a gun, load it, aim it at someone, and pull the trigger. Oh no! Now I'm guilty of murder or assault with a deadly weapon!
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Being a supporter means that you're paying subs. Even if they can't be arsed to go out and do any campaigning they're making a difference by giving money plus they're likely to talk about issues that the party raises in their newsletters.
As someone who is a member of a minority party (in the UK) I'd be very happy if we got 3,000 fee paying members all of a sudden. That kind of money and mind-share is what can lead to electoral victory.
Re:So what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow.... (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't need to vote on the pirate party to make it effective. The fact that the party has 17000 members might make the other parties act in their stead in fear of loosing votes in the next election.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you confused socialism with Soviet-style communism?
There seems to be a lot of that going around. People seem to wilfully ignore the fact that there are so many brands of socialism that it almost render the term meaningless. Saying or implying that it is absolutely inevitable that implementing some economical control or oversight will lead to a totalitarian regime.
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
There needs to be a system to report on and have abuses checked and punished.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:2, Insightful)
Wouldn't that mean that the people who write those books, companies that create all those applications, games etc and artists and recording companies who write and produce all that music, and studios who make all those movies would be out of business instantly? How would they justify the investment in money, time and work that they made if only one copy will ever be sold?
They'd only be out of business if their work sucked. People, in general, support things they like.
Not to mention all the added value inherent in buying (DRM free) physical media, and the monetization opportunities for the actual artists when their fans have free access to their work.
I would suggest you look at the business model that Trent Reznor is creating, in my opinion he is years ahead of the rest of the industry.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:2, Insightful)
Look, dumbass. People have been creating Content for millenia. It worked out just damn fine even when there weren't laws to protect copyrights. Don't be such a fucking tard to say it's not possible when there are fucking CENTURIES OF HUMAN HISTORY that prove otherwise.
People buy things they like. They go to concerts, buy t-shirts, go to book readings and book signings. They buy Photoshop at work even if they pirate it at home. They go see The Dark Knight with their friends even if they pirated it a month before. The internet has not changed that. Now go fucking troll somewhere else, you worthless piece of shit.
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Insightful)
If Slashdot wasn't responsible for the comments that are posted on their servers, they wouldn't have been forced to remove a comment in the past due to legal threat from the Church of Scientology.
Re:"Knowledge"? (Score:2, Insightful)
I suppose they think we should be allowed to walk into bookstores, take items off the shelves and freely walk out without purchasing. You know. To free up the knowledge.
Oh, you mean like a library?
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:5, Insightful)
I really hope that this Pirate party gets elected to power in Sweden and abolish the copyright laws. The economic chaos that would ensue and the ridicule that that country would be subjected to worldwide would hopefully make even the most pea brained anti-copyright wannabe crusader realize what a stupid and childish idea that is.
Actually, what's childish is your over-the-top strawman argument. If you'd bothered to check out their web site [piratpartiet.se], you'd see that they're for copyright reform, not abolition. Go back and study your subject, ignorant child.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:3, Insightful)
Wouldn't that mean that the people who write those books, companies that create all those applications, games etc and artists and recording companies who write and produce all that music, and studios who make all those movies would be out of business instantly?
If they can't manage to convince people to pay for their services, yes.
Of course, you can find many examples of people who manage to make money even for the IP they use is free. And if a good deal of the IP industry goes away, the remaining part should have an easier time to find people willing to pay.
Everything will end up in a new equilibrium. But one thing is clear, the total consumption/usage of information will be higher, because everyone will be able to afford it. It will be about as cheap as air literally, to take another zero margin cost product.
The price of copyright is always that the total spread of the information decreases. That is the simple economic nature of it. There is nothing you can do to change that.
How would they justify the investment in money, time and work that they made if only one copy will ever be sold?
If they can't, they shouldn't. There is obviously enough cheaper material on the market to satisfy everyone. The market is better served by people who see business opportunities.
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Insightful)
It has everything to do with linking people and information, since hyperlinking copyrighted material is not considered a crime in Sweden.
Until now, because torrents are technically not much more than a file with links.
Of course there's an outrage. Linking copyrighted material is LEGAL in Sweden. Hosting copyrighted material for unlawful distribution is illegal. It is obvious that The Pirate Bay have not been involved in the latter.
They got a one-year prison sentence and 30 million SEK in fines for something that is legal.
Re:What this means (Score:3, Insightful)
``what I don't understand is why they need to understand network technology. I don't know european law, but I'd imagine that its something similar to the DMCA. I would imagine that the DMCA isn't that ambiguous that you have to understand network technology to interpret it. it seems so basic to me, the site that hosts the content is in violation.''
But who is talking about hosting the content?
Re:Wow.... (Score:5, Insightful)
You are mostly correct. Mostly is the key word here, most DMCA notices are not legitimate. From an earlier /. article:
In its submission, Google notes that more than half (57%) of the takedown notices it has received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998, were sent by business targeting competitors and over one third (37%) of notices were not valid copyright claims.
(yes that adds up to over 100%, there is overlap)
There is, mostly, no penalty for sending fake notices, so people do it all the time. There needs to be statutory damages for sending invalid claims even when the claim is in good faith, and even when no financial damage is done to the victim, to combat this. In cases where the claim is actively malicious, the perjury clause needs to be enforced.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:3, Insightful)
If I understand correctly, you are proposing to tax everybody and pass on the money to the artists
You sound as if you think that's a bad idea. And, that's only one way to compensate artists. Nor does it have to be the government. There are many non-government organizations in control of many aspects of our lives. For instance, standards bodies such as ISO [iso.org], groups that test products for safety such as the UL [ul.com]. There are hundreds of charities, religious organizations, and other NGOs.
i.e. creating a complete state control over culture.
Complete? Stop being dramatic. No way will any organization, however powerful, be able to ram bad entertainment down unwilling throats. No one can stop you from singing anything you want in the shower. And there's no reason for it. In contrast, as we have seen, private entities have powerful motivation to manipulate us. It is private enterprise that brought us the horrors of Payola and Clear Channel. An example of another system in which governments are intimately involved is highway systems. Yet the government does not dictate what sort of cars people drive, so that people who feel their needs are best served by a large pickup or wagon can have them, and without having to justify it to anyone.
And, need I remind you, you and I and everyone else are the state? You do get to vote on things. You can write letters to your representatives, and, amazingly, they will sometimes be read and even acted on! Stop talking as if the the government and you are "ships in the night".
Why should people who passionately dislike certain artists be forced to finance them?
This tired argument again. As if that doesn't happen under the current system. Or wouldn't happen under any other system you can think of. A rising tide lifts all boats. Patronizing any musician helps all musicians.
If there were no legal and technical hurdles to file sharing
There aren't. The legal hurdles are almost totally ineffective. Nor is there any way for a legal approach to be effective. Yes, they killed Napster. But they couldn't kill file sharing. As to technical hurdles, it's hard to say what the ultimate limits of networking, digital storage and such might be. Artificial limitations are bypassed and ignored at will. DRM is a sad joke.
there would be some sort of "freeamazon.com" where all current music, books and software in the world can be downloaded for free, right?
There are many such. Usenet. Lots of encrypted anonymizing ones such as Tor. The ones we've all heard of such as BitTorrent, Napster, Kazaa, etc. They don't have quite everything in the world of course, but they have lots more than the lame local bricks and mortar places, and more than Amazon, since Amazon actually has far less on hand than they list. Really weak when you want something obscure and Amazon needs weeks for physical media to wend its way through a backordering process, if they can get it at all, compared to just being able to get it right now through P2P.
Wouldn't that mean that the people who write those books, companies that create all those applications, games etc and artists and recording companies who write and produce all that music, and studios who make all those movies would be out of business instantly?
No. Since when is copyright some kind of holy, blessed thing that is the only righteous and known way to earn a living from art? There are many other ways. Better ways. I don't know what it will take to persuade people like you to stop clinging to what you think is customary, traditional, and effective, when it has been so warped and beaten as to be none of those. Maybe if you read enough Slashdot, you'll eventually have a change of heart? It is hearing of the extreme and unfair measures of the enter
Re:Wow.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hahahaha. The truth is that most of these supporters probably are 'leachers', unwilling to actually expend their own effort to support it.
If the fact that they expressed their opinion by joining a political party doesn't send a strong enough message, only a revolution will. Especially if you consider how many are also outraged but don't want to join.
Re:Wow.... (Score:3, Insightful)
And has been pointed out by the Pirate Bay admins themselves, American DMCA laws do NOT apply in Sweden.
YouTube, Google et al, have very heavy investment in the US, and hence have to keep the peace and respect US laws for those services hosted in US.
But as has been pointed out many times, Google and YouTube are opt-out ... if dodgy content is found, you have to issue a DMCA takedown to get it removed ... by then it's possibly TOO late, the content has already been disseminated. And for every takedown done, 10 more copies of the exact same thing will spring up and get indexed within the next 24 hours anyway, so the whole exercise is futile.
PirateBay was in essence opt-in, i.e. someonw had to upload the torrent file at some point, but as it's kind of difficult to sue everyone in the world (especially when you have no real concept of what a torrent file even IS), they went after the easy target.
I wonder how long it'll be before they go after Mininova, Isohunt and all the others ... probably never, just like Napster, the PirateBay is a flagship "victory" for the ??IA, while at the same time not making a damn of difference in the long run.
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:3, Insightful)
This is untrue. Not only is the majority of content nowadays created without profit motive - amateur artists, writers and whatever outnumber the professional ones by a huge amount - but things like Kafka's writings were created without any. The only thing that has changed is that amateurs can nowadays publish their work easily and cheaply on the Internet.
Re:The Thief Party (Score:3, Insightful)
There is not one group of people and I don't claim they people who infringe on copyright are principled activitsts. There are MANY types of people and many different reasons for doing what they do. But the one thing they all have in common is that it is more convenience for them to do what they do than it is to buy it. People will ALWAYS do what people do. People have attempted legislation against homosexuality and it changed nothing -- some people are straight and some are gay. No amount of legislation will change what people do because it is who they are. Ultimately, the whole notion of copyright is fighting nature and nature only loses on small scales. (For example, you can build a building to keep out the rain, but you can change the weather... and no building ever stays up forever.)
"Civil disobedience" is motivated by a multitude of reasons and does not mean an organized effort. Civil disobedience is what people naturally do in the face of bad law. The fact that you seem to have read in "principled activists" into what I said shows that you are not arguing on what people say, but rather what people didn't say.
Your arguments are irrelevant largely because you read more than what is said in almost everything you post. You are quite the troll based on your comment history. I say that copyright (and indeed, intellectual property law in general... Mickey Mouse was supposed to be public domain by now!) goes too far and you say that nothing will stop pirates from "stealing." It is irrelevant. The reason why is because it is completely different from the argument I was making. There will ALWAYS be some copying and sharing. The industry and the legislators need to accept it. A proper balance should be found and supported so that the system is of benefit to both sides of the problem. As it stands, publishers are making MORE than enough profit from what they are doing and they were making lots of profit before all these draconian laws and technologies were introduced. The simple problem I see is excessive greed and abuse on the publisher's side.
Sometimes buying is more convenient than acquiring by other means. But acquiring entertainment media by other means doesn't mean it won't be bought later. For example, the more recent trand of putting out popular TV series out on DVD has led to my buying those TV series when they are available on DVD. In the mean time, those TV series are on my hard drive until such a time that they are available at stores... and are affordable. (For example, the short-lived series "Star Trek Enterprise" was initially put out as a DVD set that cost $100 per season!! WAY too much. It is now around $50 per season which sounds more affordable but still a bit prohibitive... I only have like two seasons so far...) Another reason I might download movies is the fact that they are otherwise not available to me in any other way. Take for example, the Disney Classic "The Song of the South." Disney will no longer publish the work and actively seeks its removal from public hands. Another example is foreign films which I would certainly have no problem buying from foreign suppliers except for the asinine price-control mechanism known as "region coding." So I can't get movies from Japan without a lot of work to make use of it. Buying would be a LOT more convenient if only it were made available. But one reality is that I cannot speak for everyone that copies content any more than anyone else. But I can claim that my position is one held by quite a few others and I wouldn't be surprised if that group were the majority of consumers.
I might guess that you are directly involved in an intellectual property oriented business given your history of comments and so it it would make sense that you might find the majority of the consumer side of things rather annoying. (I would guess perhaps you are in the software development business?) But the fact is you can't change the majority of people and you certainly can't fight them and expect to win. The more push giv
Re:nuclear bunker may just come in handy (Score:3, Insightful)
They supported and endorsed Obama
1: who still thinks wiretapping americans is okay
2 who put bunch of RIAA lawyers on his team
any questions?
What was the alternative like?