Seven or point seven? Pirate voting...

Well... that was the election, that was.  The Swedish parliamentary election I mean.... 

And for Piratpartiet it was a generally disappointing 0,7% of the national vote.  Nowhere in the realms of the 7% that the party took in the EU elections.  And so, both in the press and in the party there is some reflection ongoing on what happened and what it means for the future....

Not to be left out,  I'm here to draw my straw to the stack.. with of course the clear benefit of hindsight.

So what is different?

Firstly a lot of the burning issues that were on the table at the EU election are now done deals.

• the FRA legislation is on the statute book and the state can (and we assume does) routinely monitor calls, mails and surfing across the national border. 
• IPRED also made it onto the statute book...  ignoring privacy of communications & allowing copyright groups to get personal details on IP addresses suspected of copyright enfringement.
• The Pirate Bay trial reached a conviction for those in the dock - apparently signalling that linking to copyright material is a no no in the eyes of the law.

Yesterday's news.  Done deals don't make for good press, so without something of current interest it's hard to get airtime to re-open the questions.  More than that though... the lack of clear targets to oppose leaves PP campaigning on principles rather than issues - and that is both harder to get across, and also harder to generate motivation around internally.

Out in the news though it did seem that PP core issues were left on the sidelines.   Piratpartiet did get exposure on topics like child pornography being used as the thin end of the wedge for net censorship but that is such a sensitive topic that it's hard to think that you could ever expect to win votes with it. 

My perception was that the party's image in the press was too closely linked to downloading and copyright, and not enough to privacy and integrity issues. It's an impression reinfoced by the party's choice of issues...  Hosting servers for the Pirate Bay may sound cool, but has zero relevance for most voters.  Likewise hosting Wikileaks...  people are choosing a government not a new data park.

And of course, EU elections are different to national elections.  National questions are  perceived as much more about things that affect our daily life - schools, healthcare, and the money in our pocket at the end of the month.  It was always going to be a challenge to attract voters on the same scale as for the EU election.  Still, for me the party didn't get across how far the threat to our privacy has come - and why it matters enough to put all your vote on that topic. 

0,7% is pretty close to the party's result in 2006 - and a good way from the 4% needed to get in to parliament.  Does a party have a role that can't break past the post? 

The EU election showed that it does... when a significant minority of people put their vote behind the PPs principles.  Those people are still out there - perhaps with different priorities for a national election -but still out there to be reached.  And more to the point the other parties have seen how the issues can affect their result.  This time both blocs chose to keep integrity off the agenda -  but at the same time perhaps some parties have taken on board copyright, integrity and patent issues in a way not seen before. 

The green parties have been influentual in making the environment a part of mainstream politics - no one can chance not having a policy on it.  Piratpartiet - even without breaking into parliament - has the same role for privacy, integrity and the information society.  Everyone needs to be ready to talk about it..  and maybe that's a first step to getting a recognition that things need to change...

Meanwhile, from the outside at least,  Piratpartiet is proving it's worth in Brussels.  Great credentials to bring to the next fight....   In four years it's both EU and national elections.  Seven or point 7.  Which is going to be?

Putting principles first. Why a 44-year old who has never downloaded music will vote for the pirates.

It is two weeks to the election here in Sweden.. and social democrat Henrik Brändén and centerist Markus Berglund have writtin an article in the national press to explain why they are leaving their parties and will vote Piratpartiet  instead.  Henrik writes in length on his blog about why after 29 years as a socialdemocrat activist he is placing integrity first and going Pirate.  His article is very good..  and reflects a a great deal of the thinking that led me to see the political importance of the pirate movement in opposing the threat to our privacy and integrity.  Here is just a short translated extract... (the highlight is mine)

How can a 44-year old who has never downloaded music to vote for the pirates?
 When I meet young people today, I see that they, just as we did in my youth, love to talk to each other: about life and love, about politics, philosophy and existential issues. Like when I was young that many make music, poetry, short stories and diaries. But the way is different. My discussions in cafes and on the telephone takes place today with Skype and various instant messaging functions. Where I wrote a letter on paper to send young people today send an e-mail. Where I and my contemporaries had notebooks and loose-leaf with personal notes and literary experiments many of today's young people's have materials in a data space on an external server, so that wherever they find themselves they are be able to access it over the net.

The combination of IPRED-law, the FRA-law and data retention directive does for young people today exactly what it would have meant for me and my friends if there sat microphones under the tables in all Uppsala cafes, our phone calls were tapped and letters ripped up, and also book and music publishers agents always had the right to rummage through our bags. What has happened in recent years is simply that we have taken great strides straight into a surveillance society. Things are a reality today in Sweden and many other Western countries,  that in my youth led us to distance itself from East Germany and other Communist states"

Henrik also explains how he squares his choice with his principles.. and not least how as an author he can support a party seeking copyright reform. 

Which just remains for me to add my belated welcome to Henrik.. 

Arrrrrr!!  Welcome on board

Piratpartiet :  Vote Pirate -  Make your voice heard.

ACTA under fire at the EU Parliament

There have been rumblings for some time at the EU Parliament about the negotiations on the ACTA counterfeiting and trade negotiations.  Parliament doesn't like being told they are not allowed to see what the negotiators are agreeing on their behalf and for the benefit or otherwise of Europe's citizens.

Now the decks are cleared and the cannons rolled out and the parliamentarians are taking action.  Christian Engström, Piratpartiet's MEP is one of the movers behind a motion that in fine words tells the Commission to stop fannying around and put all their cards on the table.  Pointing out among other things that
 "the Commission has since the 1 December 2009 the legal obligation to immediately and fully inform the European Parliament at all stages of international negotiations"

But it's not just an armlock to get visibility of what the negotiators are up to - the motion goes further, and places concrete limitations on what the negotiators can sign up for.

"..no to three-strikes Hadopi-type legislation, and no to searches of laptops, cell phones and other digital devices at the borders by customs officers".

Representation in parliament.  Isn't it wonderful.  Voting on the motion is today... though it sounds like it has broad cross party support which sounds promising.

All quotes from Christian's blog.

(PS: life's kind of busy right now... so blogging is on a bit of a low tide.)

Information politics. Share the news.

There is a new site for all your 'infopolitics' news.....   set up by Piratpartiet and the Greens in the European Parliament Infopolitics.eu is a news aggregation site for english language news on information politics.   Awareness is an important part of getting our message across so this I see as a great step forward.

Spread the news.....  

EU Parliament sticks to it's guns - 138 text agreed...

"A camel - is a horse designed by a committee"

Christian Engström, Piratpartiets MEP,  reports that the negotiations over the wording of what was amendment 138 are now complete.  The full text is available on his blog.  I dare say lawyers on all sides are now going over it to see what it will mean in practce but on the face of it it provides the main safeguards that parliament had agreed were needed - including a guarantee of a prior, fair and impartial procedure.

The text is not bomb proof.  I suspect in practice that much will depend on an interpretation of whether it is "fair and impartial" to cut someone off and only allow them to test it in a court afterwards.   .. and an interpretation of what is a 'duly substantiated case of urgency' as a reason to circumvent due process.

I for one though want to take the opportunity of thanking Christian, Phillipe Lamberts and all the other members of the parliamentary committee for sticking to their guns. 

I hope now their camel is fit for the course....


Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party -  Putting privacy first.

Protect children - but not like this

Sweden, it's proposed, should have a law that bans looking at child pornography - ostensibly because if no one can look at it no one is going to make it.  (It is of course already illegal to make and spread child pornography).

Is that a good idea?  A number of bloggers have already come out to say that it's not - including PP stalwarts Rick Falkvinge & Anna Troberg who go further and say it should be a political issue for Piratpartiet.

So is it a good idea? And does it fall into the scope of pirate politics?

OK - Is it likely to be effective?  Consider that Sweden's population is a fraction of a percent of the global population - and that child pornography is an international problem.  That means unless Swedes are prolific consumer's of child porn it's unlikely to have a noticeable impact on the supply side.  Unless this legislation impacts on the creation of child pornography it is ineffective in improving life for those caught up as children in it's production. It seems that it will fail in it's primary objective.

Then there is the philosophical question - how does someone know you have looked at something pornographic if they haven't looked at it.  And if they have seen it haven't they themselves committed a crime?

..which leads to the practical problem of how do I avoid committing this crime if I have no way of knowing what is in an image - or on a web page - before I've seen it. 

..and what constitutes a pornographic image of a child?   That's undoubtedly defined somewhere for those working in enforcement - but will a layman know?  .. this last is pertinent as the legislation will apply for images of models under 18.  How can you tell from an image how old the person is???  ..before you've even seen the image?

But, practical issues apart - there is a big issue with the scope.  You see there is one group of people that take lots of pictures of semi-clad teenagers -  doing innocent and not so innocent things, and that is teenagers themselves.   Now you might think it unseemly and immodest - but what happens legally between consenting young adults is more than likely going end up on camera sometimes.  Fine - but this law would make it illegal to ever look at those pictures....

And if you think this is improbable you don't need to look further than the USA in March this year where teenage girls were threatened with being convicted of 'sexual abuse of children' for sharing semiclad photos - of themselves....

Fighting child porn is, or should be about working to protect the innocence of the child victims of that industry.  Legislation that would make criminals where there are no victims is bad legislation -  and criminalising teenagers for doing something that their elder peers can do legally is hypocritical, and an injustice.

Add to that the question of enforcement. How do you know who has looked at what?  Legislation is pointless if it's not enforceable.    What kind of surveillance powers are going to be needed to ensure compliance - monitoring everyone's surfing?  Police trojans on every desktop? 

So if we sum up:  Ineffective, disproportionate and with serious risks for our rights to a private life... 
not least for millions of teenagers who deserve the right to grow up unmolested by intrusive legislation.

An Open Letter to the Music Industry

Rick Falkvinge, leader of the Swedish Pirate Party, Piratpartiet, has issued an open letter to the music industry - following a speech he made at a music industry event in Manchester. While reports of the event are interesting for the reaction the speech generated, Rick's letter is a 'must read' for anyone interested in digital rights and the future of copyright.  Right on the button....

Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party -  Working for copyright reform.

FRA, 138, Drowning dogs and heavy British Boots...

It's an interesting week in parliament this week... at least for those with an eye for justice and individual rights and privacy. 

In Sweden the FRA legislation (that means state monitoring of all international traffic (voice, mail, sms, email etc) passing Swedens borders is up for review.  It's already on the statute book.. but all it needs is four MPs from the ruling alliance to vote against, or eight to abstain and the law will be torn up.  The stakes are high...  not least as it will be a hot topic for next year's parliamentary elections if the opposition don't succeed in getting it stopped.

Meanwhile, over at the EU discussions on the Telecom Package and the famous amendment 138 come to a head tomorrow with another meeting between ministers and the parliamentary representatives (Piratpartiets MEP Christian Engström among them).  Much to the disgust of the Green group the parliamentary delegation have already agreed not to press ministers on other areas like net neutrality, but still they still want to see the parliaments proposals implemneted - making judicial review a necessary condition for disconnecting people from the Internet.  'Innocent until proven guilty' doesn't sound like such a controversial position now does it?

I've been impressed by the degree of communication both of the issues and the process and progress in the Swedish blogosphere - not least from pirates HAX, Christian and Rick.  Communication even when the Council of Minister's hide their negotiating position behind a 'Confidential' stamp.

Latest from HAX is a report on how the British have been lobbying Eva-Britt Svensson - a left wing MEP - to support their position on cutting people off from the internet without trial. Apparently, according to the Brits it's all a question of child pornography.  Eva-Britt, feminist, and chairman of the equality working party, doesn't agree....

"..it's instead the possibility for powerful capitalist interests within principally the entertainment industry to drive enforcement work, and through Internet suppliers stop those that are copying music and games on the web through e.g The Pirate Bay and similar search engines.  It's all about putting a stop to consumption of culture by those that can't or don't believe they can afford the prices that the industry decides."

If I can steal a quote...  
"When you want to drown a dog you say it has rabies."
                                                          Jean-Pierre Brard (Parti Communiste Français) 
...from the French parliamentary debate on 'HADOPI 2' when the French justice minister started to talk about child pornography.

Update:  the vote on FRA is in fact next week, weds Oct 14th.

Redefining piracy

Christian Engström, Piratpartiet's MEP reports on proceedings at JURI, the EU committee on legal affairs, who have been debating counterfeiting and piracy - specifically this document:
Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market 
- which contains plans to set up an 'observatory' on counterfeiting and piracy.

It's an initiative that PP blogger Mikael Nilsson describes as "a comprehensive campaign to, together with the copyright industry, find the best methods to chase and brainwash  the population"

Christian, who sits on JURI as part of his work at the EU parliament, took the chance at the meeting to point out that counterfeiting and piracy are not at all the same thing - and that piracy is is not a judicial term and they in fact mean copyright infringement. 

He's only partly right since (maritime) piracy is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982 as "any criminal acts of violence, detention, or depredation committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or aircraft that is directed on the high seas against another ship, aircraft, or against persons or property on board a ship or aircraft."  (It must be true... Wikipedia says so...).  ..which begs the question what does that have to do with intellectual property and copyright?

Christian's point though is that lumping non-commercial file sharing, which Piratpartiet wants to legalise, with counterfeiting, which we don't, muddies the waters -  and really only to the benefit of the copyright industry. 

In the comments to the article 'Daniel' points out that use of the term piracy is most probably because it's stigmatising meaning has taken root.  ..and of course he's right.  Talking about 'Piracy' is intended to imply that something bad is happening and the term can't be considered neutral or impartial. 

Which set me thinking... we need a campaign to take back what is ours.  Conservatives have conservatism.  Liberals have liberalism, and Pirates have piracy.  In a political context Pirates now means the pirate movement, and piracy by analogy properly ought to mean "following pirate ideology" - sharing culture, opposing intellectual monopolies and above all respect for civil and human rights (like privacy).

In which case... an observatory on 'piracy' would be a good thing...  (We need more people looking out for our rights and principles)

Anyone care to sign up?