[Upd-discuss] Piracy and the Courts

[Adam Moran]

FFII's position : IPRED2: Adding criminal sanctions to a legal minefield [1]

   "In order to fight piracy, IPRED 2 makes all commercial violations
   of “intellectual property rights" a crime. All commercial violations.
   But not all commercial violations of these rights are piracy ...

   ... Take Patent law. Patent law definitions are unclear and drifting.
   In some sectors, like the software industry, it is impossible not to
   violate patents. Microsoft has been violating many patents, and had
   to pay huge damages. But do we really want to see Bill Gates in
   prison?   He can go to jail, together with Europe's software
   developers, since IPRED 2 criminalises companies that are not
   pirates."

Stallman's experiences with rfid during wsis (Modified by Geert Lovink)
: Quoting Richard Stallman [2]. ( Cf. [3] )

   "... So this is something so dangerous to democracy,
   that it must be stamped out at all costs.

   And I believe that it should be a crime
   For a business to even hint
   To a government
   That it would move an operation
   For any reasons other than
   The direct economic profit of that operation

   That is:
   Using a threat of moving an activity
   To make demands on the government
   Should be a crime
   Which causes the people involved to be imprisoned for many years
   And probably causes company assets to be confiscated completely

   This is what you must do if you want democracy"

I am reminded of one of Antonio's lines in the Tempest ...

   "The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the beginning"

.. and in view of the proposed sentencing guidelines, perhaps more
appropriate for war crimes, I would suggest a defence in the form of
Socrates' Apology, eg:

Babeuf's Defence ( part ) : May 1797 - Published 1884

   "But you say that it is my ideas which would send society back to
   barbarism. The great philosophers of the century did not think so;
   and it is they whose disciple I am. You should be arraigning the
   monarchy for having shown itself so much less inquisitorial than
   the government of our present Republic; you should arraign it for
   not having prevented me from getting hold of the pernicious books
   of the Mablys, the Helvétius, the Diderots, the Jean-Jacques.
   Philanthropists of today !

   If it had not been for the poisons of these philanthropists,
   I might share your moral principles and your virtues :
   I might have been moved by the tenderest solicitude for the
   minority of the mighty of this world;
   I might have been pitiless for the suffering mass." [4]

Further, I note that:

   "The All Party Parliamentary Internet Group (APIG) in the UK was
   contacted by a volunteer to determine whether they were
   interested in hearing from consumers as part of their announced
   study of DRM, and they confirm that they are very interested
   ("very keen") indeed to hear from the public on the subject of
   digital rights management (see previous article for details on
   their study). They would like to figure out to what degree
   protection is needed for both copyright holders and consumers.

   In fact, they have provided guidelines on how to present case
   studies and submissions for those who wish to participate, along
   with suggested reading prior to preparing the material, which I
   reproduce here. Note the proposed legislation they would like
   you to read first, including "Proposal for a EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the
   enforcement of intellectual property rights," or "IPRED2" [PDF].

   [...]

   The inquiry has asked for all written evidence to be submitted
   by 21st December 2005. The Officers of APIG following
   consideration of written evidence, will decide, which
   organisations and individuals to invite to give oral evidence in
   Westminster in January 2006."  [5].  ( Cf. [6] )

And referring back to the FFII's position [1] ...

   "... For the sake of protection of carefully balanced national
   procedural law systems, subsidiarity and legal security, in order
   to keep Europe's software developers out of jail, we ask you to
   reject these superfluous and detrimental proposals.

   The European Parliament rejected the software patents directive. We
   heartily thank you for that. The IPRED 2 directive and framework
   should go the same way."

This would seem to be an appropriate position for copyright holders per
se, whether the copyright holder is a software developer or a software
user.

--

[1] Full details http://wiki.ffii.org/IpredEp051122En

[2] http://www.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/podcasting_richard_stallman.ogg

[3] World Summit on the Information Society - Civil Society Strikes
     Back (With the Help of its Friends)

The official opening of the diplomatic phase of WSIS began with a
clarion call from the president of Switzerland (host of the 2003 Geneva
phase of the summit) for respect for free expression.

Press Release: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/16/tunisi12051.htm

November 16, 2005

Refer also:

* http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/15/mena12011.htm
* http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/15/tunisi12040.htm
* http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/14/tunisi12019.htm
* http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/14/tunisi12026.htm

[4] Edmund Wilson notes that Babeuf was given a Plutarch by his dad,
when his dad lay dying upon his death bed. Further his dad said
apparently, that he wished he could have played the part of Caius Gracchus.

[5] Groklaw: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2005112106345237

[6] Coincidently, I applied for a position at Westminster recently; to
work as the Director of Policy & Communications of the Liberal
Democrats. I had and have in mind citing precedence for the
formation of a coalition. This was my preamble:

"I became politicised during the miners strike of 1984. Not as a trade
unionist, but as an individual who lived through the extreme economic
harshness and violence that it brought to my county, my friends and
family. At this time I held both Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill
to blame, in varying degrees. But, I realised in hindsight that they
were little more than caricatures representative of their respective
political movements.

Out of this time, I lost confidence in electoral systems and have since
tended to spoil my vote in protest.

Nevertheless, I have been active in politics with a small 'p', duties
permitting, for the last twenty years; mainly in unelected positions,
taken, given or thrust upon me, for reason of my moral code, coupled
with my negotiation and arbitration skills.

I have never been a member of any political party, and I am very
cautious of hierarchies in general. It appears to me that however well
intentioned a party may sound in opposition, they will no doubt live a
different story once in power."