TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Aussie Pirates Just Miss Election Ballot

ppauAustralian pirates hoping to emulate their European counterparts and elect a pirate have had their hopes dashed today. The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Pirate Party had their bid to get on the ballot rejected.

In a press release today the region’s electoral commission revealed that the pirate group fell short of the 100-member requirement by just 6, after 16 of the 110 names submitted failed checks. As a result the party will not be listed on the ballot for the October 20th election.

The rejection isn’t going to stop the 6-week old state party from running candidates through. Instead of running them as ‘Pirate Party Candidates’, they will be running as unlabeled independents. “The ACT has three electorates,” Glen Takkenberg, the territory’s Registered Officer told TorrentFreak, “and I’d like all Canberrans to have the chance to vote pirate.”

Meanwhile it’s the opposite story in Russia, where attempts to register the Pirate Party were thwarted by the Justice Ministry and backed by a judge who objected to the name. As a result of changes in the law following the December 2011 elections, the Russian Pirate Party was finally allowed to register under its proper name, and did so in an event June 30th.

That also means it’s almost possible to circumnavigate the globe entirely (albeit at 60°N) and stay in countries where the Pirate Party is officially recognised.

Finally, another success in for the Pirates in Italy. Back in April we reported on how a group was attempting to use the Pirate Party name, for an un-Pirate Party purpose. The judge saw through that, and ordered the ‘fake’ Pirate Party group (called pirateparty.it and run by Marco Marsili) to stop, and to refrain from using the name or domains that implied that they represented the Pirate Party.

Marsili appealed and last week the courts affirmed (Italian, translation) their earlier judgement. Any further violations of the name will carry a fine of €500 as well as a €200/day fine for any delay in complying. Signor Marsili was also ordered to pay all costs.

This post is from the News Bits section of TorrentFreak where we present stories from around the web in a concise summary format. Full TorrentFreak articles can be found here. If you have a tip please let us know. News Bits have their very own RSS feed
  • Travis McCrea

    While this could be viewed as a setback, the Pirate Party of Australia has an amazing team of volunteers who put countless hours to the cause. If they can’t have Pirate written on the ballot, they will promote the ideology with independent candidates.

    Australians are lucky to have such a great party, and they will eventually be elected. #VotePirate

    • McCheezits

      I totally agree with you @1048c0ab62454342a3dfb373e0f9dbd2:disqus. The Aussie Pirate party is one of the greatest out there.

      Unfortunately New Zealand’s pirate party has not reached levels that the Aussies have, but we’re getting there.

  • Mwhahaha

    “…a group was attempting to use the Pirate Party name, for an un-Pirate Party purpose. The judge saw through that, and ordered the ‘fake’ Pirate Party groupto stop, and to refrain from using the name or domains that implied that they represented the Pirate Party.”
    And I remember laughing my ass off. IP theft is dandy until it affects you.

    Anyway, that sucks about the Aussies’ PP. 
    It would be interesting to know what checks they failed and even more interesting to know why the PP didn’t make sure all their candidates would pass the checks.
    It doesn’t bode well for their ability to govern, if they’re as piss poor as regular political parties when it comes to the fundamentals. 

    If you support a political group you should be the first to pressure them when they fuck up, instead of defending their mistakes simply because of a shared ideology.

    • BJonesTF

      There’s a bit of a difference between a digital copy of something that is otherwise identical, and having something with the same name but the opposite intention, specifically to confuse (as was noted by the judge back in april)

      The Australian thing is stated clearly in the press release from the electoral commission – it was members, not candidates, and 16 of them could not be verified with the information they had provided with what was in the electoral commissions database at the time of the deadline.

      Please read the supporting links. I don’t put them in for my health.

    • Fredrika

      > “And I remember laughing my ass off. IP theft is dandy until it affects you.”

      Yeah there were a couple of idiots that commented under that article, that had a hard time keeping the trademark monopoly apart from the copyright monopoly, which are two completely different legislative monopolies, with completely different purposes.

      Pirates have a problem with the copyright monopoly. Pirates do not have a problem with neither the trademark monopoly, nor the laws against arson, vandalism and murder, so there’s no comparison to be made. Trademark infringements are never funny, regardless of who they affect, because they always hurt the customers. There’s no logical connection that causes any irony from the fact that those who oppose the copyright monpoly are subjected to trademark infringements.

      Intelligent people understand this logical fact. Ignorant people who deliberately or unintentionally confuse these completely different legislative monopolies don’t. Would you like to explain what your excuse was?

      Finally, there’s no such thing as IP theft. An infringement into a legislative monopoly is never ever theft, an indisputable fact that can be verified in the law or a dictionary. Are you to ignorant to understand this?

      • Dirty

        “Finally, there’s no such thing as IP theft. An infringement into a legislative monopoly is never ever theft, an indisputable fact that can be verified in the law or a dictionary. Are you to ignorant to understand this?”

        Are you able to verify this for those intellegent enough not to swallow everything you say?

        • Fredrika

          > “Cool… please verify this.”

          > “Are you able to verify this for those intellegent enough not to swallow everything you say?”

          It’s a simple matter of pointing them in the direction of a copyright legislation of their choice, maybe from their native country. In it they can verify that a copyright infringement is not theft, any
          more than what arson, vandalism or murder is. Theft, arson, vandalism
          and murder
          is something completely different than an infringement. Did you not know this?

          Btw, Tom/Dirty Bear/Dirty/Bob, why do you post comments under so many different signatures and user profiles? Is it an attempt at making yourself out to be several different persons, while you are in fact only one? Disqus offers you the possibility to merge different profiles, so maybe you can merge these three?

          http://disqus.com/guest/dfc46bcdf9cc58289afb68cf4d25006c/
          http://disqus.com/Dirty_Bear/
          http://disqus.com/guest/226128832e0f0566f07c029fc434e8bb/

        • Dirty_Bear

          “It’s a simple matter of pointing them in the direction of a copyright legislation of their choice, maybe from their native country. In it they can verify that a copyright infringementis not theft, any more than what arson, vandalism or murder is.”

          So you aren’t able to verify it. That’s all you had to say.  

          “Theft, arson, vandalism and murder is something completely different than an infringement. Did you not know this? ”

          And what does this have to do with anything I said? You wouldn’t be using a strawman now Fredrika? I mean, that’s very unlike you………

          “Tom/Dirty Bear/Dirty/Bob, why do you post comments under so many different signatures and user profiles? Is it an attempt at making yourself out to be several different persons, while you are in fact only one? Disqus offers you the possibility to merge different profiles, so maybe you can merge these four?”
          TorrentFreak seems to prevent me from posting so I sometimes need to use a new account in order to post. Simple answer really. Sorry I couldn’t give a cooler answer than “Torrentfreak appears to censoring me”. But you figured out that it was me. Well done. You really need to give yourself a medal.

          Thanks for the advice by the way. I shall be merging those accounts.
           

        • Fredrika

          > “So you aren’t able to verify it. That’s all you had to say.”

          You seem to have a problem reading out a logical conclusion from a statement. The answer i provided did in no way mean that i couldn’t verify it. On the contrary, i can. And try to re-read what you actually asked me. You did not ask me to actually verify it, you asked me if i could. Are you having a problem understanding what you yourself actually wrote?

          > “And what does this have to do with anything I said?”

          Because some ignorant people, you in particular, which you have proven over the last couple of months, do have a hard time understanding which crimes that are theft, and which aren’t, so to help you on your way of learning about reality, i pointed out a few different crimes that aren’t theft, a few of which were crimes that are committed against property, which still doesn’t make them theft.

          > “You wouldn’t be using a strawman now Fredrika? I mean, that’s very unlike you………”

          Actually, no, that sentence did not constitute a straw-man argument, because the previously argued acts of theft and infringement was mentioned in it. That something additional was mentioned does not make it a straw-man argument. A factual claim is not an argument in the first place. Do you not even understand the difference between stating a fact and putting forward an argument, which you then respond to? Facts are not arguments, facts are premisses on which arguments are based.

        • Dirty_Bear

          “You seem to have a problem reading out a logical conclusion from a statement. The answer i provided did in no way mean that i couldn’t verify it. On the contrary, i can”

          But you aren’t Fred. You aren’t.

          “Because some ignorant people, you in particular, which you have proven over the last couple of months, do have a hard time understanding which crimes that are theft, and which aren’t, so to help you on your way of learning about reality, i pointed out a few different crimes that aren’t theft, a few of which were crimes that are committed againstproperty, which still doesn’t make them theft.”

          Once again. When I or anyone else talk about theft and piracy in the same sentence we are not in anyway referring to the legal definitions of the word. We are of course referring to it’s colloquial use.  Piracy is obviously not legally Theft as legally it is Copyright Infringement. That is obvious. So it’s pointless taking about crime. This is a prime example of you using a strawman.

          “Actually, no, that sentence did not constitute a straw-man argument, because the previously argued acts of theft and infringement was mentioned in it. That somethingadditional was mentioned does not make it a straw-man argument. A factual claim is not an argument in the first place. Do you not even understand the difference between stating afact and putting forward an argument, which you then respond to? Facts are not arguments, facts are premisses on which arguments are based.”

          You rarely state facts and you rarely backup or provide any rationale for your statements. You just expect the reader to take your word for it. I’m sure that some of the more credulous do. Oh, and a strawman can exist alongside relevant arguments.
           

        • Fredrika

          > “But you aren’t Fred. You aren’t.”

          Because no one has asked me to? Please learn to read.

          > “Once again. When I or anyone else talk about theft and piracy in the same sentence we are not in anyway referring to the legal definitions of the word. We are of course referring to it’s colloquial use.”

          Which still proves that you and anyone else are indeed ignorant, and have problems understanding logic. You can not use the word theft colloquially about the act of manufacturing something with one’s own property, that oneself owns, according to information which is freely given to that person. Nothing goes missing, and all property involved in the act is owned by the filesharer. No theft whatsoever takes place, nether legislative or colloquially, according to any correct use of the word. For colloquially use if the word theft something scarce most go missing, which isn’t the case with an infringement.

          > “So it’s pointless taking about crime. This is a prime example of you using a strawman.”

          Please re-read the sentence, and then think harder. Your argument is that an infringement can be called theft, and that argument is based on the fact that an infringement is indeed a crime. You do not call legal copying theft, now do you? So it is indeed relevant to talk about crimes, and give examples of crimes that can’t be called theft colloquially. Because the foundation for your use of the word theft is that the act is a crime, it is in no way a straw-man argument to bring up crimes.

          > “You rarely state facts..”

          The claim was that an infringement wasn’t theft any more than what murder, arson or vandalism, and that those acts are something completely diffrent than theft. That claim is indeed factual, regardless of if you use the word theft about murder, arson, vandalism or an infringement. Nor does it change the fact that you seem to have a problem understanding what constitutes a straw-man argument.

          > “..and you rarely backup or provide any rationale for your statements.”

          If you have a problem with a statement i put forward, and you can not accept it as it is written based purely on the premisses than is provided, please speak up and ask, and i will explain it to you in great detail, until even you understand it.

          > “You just expect the reader to take your word for it.”

          If you find a statement from me which you can’t accept as it is written, please speak up. I dare you. Those who do always get a response from mer, until the matter has been clarified.

          > “Oh, and a strawman can exist alongside relevant arguments.

          And i have not claimed otherwise, so that was a straw-man argument. My claim was that the fact that something additional is mentioned in a reply doesn’t in itself make it a straw-man argument.

    • Schreiber

      Two months ago, PPAU weren’t even considering running in the election. Someone suggested “Oh, there’s an election in a month or two, we could run independents,” and other said “why not try to register?” It was worth a short, but sadly they didn’t get enough to register.

      Pretty clear cut, and I wouldn’t say it was a “fuck up”. It was an attempt at short notice, and I’m told got something like 200 new members in two weeks. I find it funny how everyone thinks this was a serious, considered attempt. It wasn’t. Initially there weren’t enough ACT members to do anything there. Missing out by 6 is pretty impressive.

      • http://twitter.com/LiamPomfret Liam Pomfret

        To elaborate a bit more on this….the ones who were rejected, as I understand things, were mostly people who’d failed to change their registration to the current ACT address, with maybe a couple of young people who’d actually never registered in the first place. The party’s application was sent in literally 5 minutes before the deadline, so there wasn’t enough time to check the names, but it had been hoped that the 10 name buffer would be enough. Evidently, that buffer wasn’t conservative enough. Still, there’s no doubt at this point that the party will be registered in the ACT, it’s just not going to be registered in time for this particular election. This is a good learning experience for PPAU as well. The ACT membership drive brought in a lot more members all across the country, and the lessons learned here should insure that the registration process in other states  will go more smoothly.

    • http://twitter.com/7daykatie katie anderson

      It’s not IP theft but passing off.  People have a right to know who they are dealing with. 

      This is the only legitimate purpose and approach to any kind of rights attached to identifying “brands” of this kind. 

      If a use would confuse the general public about who they are dealing with, then it infringes.  If not, then there is no merit to classing it as an infringement.  Brand protections should never be treated as an individual entity’s property right, and always as a consumer right, otherwise we end up with unacceptable nonsense like the chilling Olympics “trademark” premised oppression.

  • Anonymous

    i sincerely hope that the citizens of Aus will take advantage of the chance they have here and vote for the ‘Pirate’ Party in October. what they need to think about is, although they may not get much in the way of power to begin with, they will increase in popularity. they should think about the alternative, certainly the one they have atm, in someone who doesn’t seem to know whose arse to kiss next!

    • Guest

      It’s actually only a state election (that being the ACT – Australian Capital Territory but for keeping this post simple I’ll refer to it as a state) so not all citizens of Aus can vote in this election.

      Canberra being the capital for both Australia and that state is an easy thing to overlook though (similar to confusion between Washington and Washington DC [state vs city/country capital] ).

  • Pingback: Aussie Pirates Just Miss Election Ballot | OccuWorld

  • Guest

    PPI (Pirate Party International), the worlds weapon against thick headed money mongers who live in the past.

  • David Campbell

    My hat goes of to Glen Tekkenburg, they recruited 80 members and wrote a state party constitution in 4 weeks which is amazing!

  • Guest

    Gives me hopes that someday there will be strong pirate parties in latin america too.
    They’re doing great in europe so far.

  • Dirty Bear

    jhj

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

  • Feds Seize Cash from Major Bitcoin Exchange’s Dwolla Account

    The U.S. Government has taken a significant action against the web’s top Bitcoin exchange by seizing...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.