TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Too Controversial: Pirate Party Banned From Gaming Exhibition

Despite having booked and paid for their booth at Gamex, Sweden’s largest gaming exhibition, the Pirate Party have been excluded from the action this week. The party, who say they were nagged for 2 to 3 months to book for the event, were this week informed they were too controversial and no longer welcome.

Running from the 3rd to 6th November, Gamex is Sweden’s biggest gaming show. All the big names in interactive entertainment are there showing off their wares, including giants such as Activision, Electronic Arts, Microsoft and Nintendo.

One group that will not be there, however, are the Swedish Pirate Party.

“The Pirate Party would have been in place inside the show, but now we will not be,” says Pirate Party leader Anna Troberg. “We are simply no longer welcome.”

Troberg says that after the sales people from the exhibition pursued the party for months to participate, they decided to book and pay for a booth. Not only that, the party also agreed to a package of advertising and hotel rooms.

As can be seen from the photograph below of pre-event billboard advertising, everything was in place for the party to participate.

Gamex

But earlier this week, just before the event was due to start, the Pirate Party received some surprise news.

“On Tuesday afternoon, I called a representative of the show with a few simple practical questions, but she seemed generally stressed out and said something vague about the show and not wanting any problems before she hung up,” says Troberg.

“I thought it was a bit strange, but in the afternoon, the pieces fell into place when the fair manager, Bear Wengse, phoned me and kindly, but firmly, announced that the Pirate Party was no longer welcome at the fair.”

Wengse informed Troberg that the exhibition is a meeting place and not a venue for political conflict and the party’s presence could cause problems, particularly since some of their work “could be perceived as criminal.”

Troberg countered that as a political party they only want to change certain laws democratically, and that can not be considered a crime. Nevertheless, the ban stood.

There isn’t a complete ban on politics at the event, though. The Swedish Social Democratic Youth League (SSU) are being allowed to appear – even though they too support the decriminalization of non-commercial file sharing.

However, the SSU probably fly a little more easily under the radars of some of the more prominent entertainment industry exhibitors at Gamex – Warner, Sony and Disney as prime examples. There’s no proof that these companies objected to the Pirate Party’s presence, but the party’s support for their arch-enemy – The Pirate Bay – won’t have gone unnoticed.

Nevertheless, Troberg is upbeat. She extended thanks to the forces behind the party’s exclusion, the net result of which was more exposure for the party than they would have otherwise achieved at the exhibition, and at much less expense.

Visitors to the show wanting to show their support for the party weren’t disappointed, though. Yesterday the party’s Young Pirate division were outside the event, handing out free T-shirts to be worn inside.

“I find it absolutely hilarious that a gaming fair banned the Pirate Party on the official pretext that ‘our culture is harmful to gaming’,” Rick Falkvinge, founder of the first Pirate Party, told TorrentFreak.

“A decade down the road, people will just shake their heads at that. What else can you do, really?”

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Bo Ulrich

    …and now, please bend over deeply…

  • Anonymouse

    Outside demonstration…placards to read…’Censorship 2011′…anybody?

  • RIAAtarded

    Courtesy of wiki, best to credit them before someone tries to sue me claiming they own the word…Discrimination is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership in a certain group or category. It involves the actual behaviors towards groups such as excluding or restricting members of one group from opportunities that are available to another group.

    You’d think somewhere we as a race would learn but sadly we aren’t the brightest group and seeing some things that go on it is a miracle we ever made it to the top of the food chain. Discrimination is always breed by fear and ignorance. If the gaming industry was confident in it’s position then they wouldn’t fear the Pirate Parties presence at the event. If you’re in the right you’re arguments can stand up to tests like this. If I was the Pirate Party I’d take legal action. Exclusion based on beliefs has lead to some of the biggest injustices in history.

    • Ven

      It’s not discrimination, the party’s core values simply didn’t fit at a gaming expo shock full of industry developers.

      I would be willing to bet however that some other guest developer (or group of developers) threatened to pull out if the PP stayed.

      • RIAAtarded

        Whether the values fit or not is irrelevant and shouldn’t even be a factor in participation at the event. As they have chosen to exclude them though for those values it is the definition of discrimination. Sad thing is you’re probably right about other participants crying foul at their inclusion in the event. It is just short sighted on their part as pirates aren’t looking for everything to be free what they are looking for is better access and less restrictions to what they purchased. They are also concerned about how many freedoms are being lost to prop up the industries failing business model. Speaking candidly it is something we all should be concerned with including them as they will be subject to the same laws.

        • Ven

          It’s not discrimination because booth spots are not openly offered to the public. They pick and choose based on what they think will best serve their gaming expo.

        • Guest123

          I think I know the disagreement here. Ven, this is technically discrimination. They are discriminating when they say the Pirate Party doesn’t fit their values. They could say the same thing about other political parties asking to join the event, or basketball players asking to have a booth, and that would still be discrimination. That’s not a bad thing. However, the claim here seems to be that this particular instance consists of bigotry and intolerance, and in that aspect, RIAAtarded is wrong.

          RIAAtarded, this is not bigotry. The event is not a public forum, and not everyone is free to attend. It is a private function. The proprietors and organizers have a right to decide who they do and do not want attending, which means that can refuse to give accommodations to any organization they choose. The event is not meant to be a political event so much as it is a publicity event, and having any controversy can be bad for their business. The Pirate Party is likely to generate controversy because of the strong feelings surrounding the legality of Piracy on both sides, particularly in how many gamers feel that Pirates are nothing more than parasites (not agreeing or disagreeing, just saying that many people do feel that way). That’s bad for business, and they have a right to not accommodate anyone they don’t want to. Their only flaw was initially offering a spot to the Pirate Party.

        • Guest123

          I think I know the disagreement here. Ven, this is technically discrimination. They are discriminating when they say the Pirate Party doesn’t fit their values. They could say the same thing about other political parties asking to join the event, or basketball players asking to have a booth, and that would still be discrimination. That’s not a bad thing. However, the claim here seems to be that this particular instance consists of bigotry and intolerance, and in that aspect, RIAAtarded is wrong.

          RIAAtarded, this is not bigotry. The event is not a public forum, and not everyone is free to attend. It is a private function. The proprietors and organizers have a right to decide who they do and do not want attending, which means that can refuse to give accommodations to any organization they choose. The event is not meant to be a political event so much as it is a publicity event, and having any controversy can be bad for their business. The Pirate Party is likely to generate controversy because of the strong feelings surrounding the legality of Piracy on both sides, particularly in how many gamers feel that Pirates are nothing more than parasites (not agreeing or disagreeing, just saying that many people do feel that way). That’s bad for business, and they have a right to not accommodate anyone they don’t want to. Their only flaw was initially offering a spot to the Pirate Party.

        • Danny

          @Ven and Guest123

          The organisers pressured the pirate party to take a booth so obviously they would fit in at the expo, or at least the organisers thought they would. It is discrimination as obviously some other attendees decided they didn’t like the pirate parties beliefs!

        • kmeisthax

          To all the people saying “this isn’t a public forum therefore it’s not discrimination” would you kindly point yourself towards the Civil Rights Act where we said that private forums are not exempt from anti-discrimination laws?

        • 34t

          That applies to businesses having to offer their services to anyone. It doesn’t apply to having to accept anyone for a private function. They can say that they don’t think the pirates fit with their principles, and therefore not allow them to have a seat, in the same way that the DNC wouldn’t have to allow a Republican speaker. They can’t say that anyone who is a pirate is banned from actually attending. Important distinction.

        • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

          “That applies to businesses having to offer their services to anyone. It doesn’t apply to having to accept anyone for a private function.”

          PERSONAL OPINION! Need I say more here?

        • 34t

          ….. Yeah, you kinda do need to say more. He’s talking about the law. I explained what the law actually says. I’m not seeing where opinion comes into this.

          An opinion would be “I think the requirements that the Civil Rights Act requires are too stringent” as opposed to “legally, the requirements aren’t what you said they are.”

        • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

          “Yeah, you kinda do need to say more. He’s talking about the law. I explained what the law actually says. I’m not seeing where opinion comes into this.”

          You are missing the fact that a lot of people in America and elsewhere are coming down on the side that the First Amendment and the laws in other countries around the world are NOT just meant to prevent the federal government from infringing on free speech, but are meant to keep private companies and people from doing that as well.

          There is NO consensus, except among extreme conservatives, that the First Amendment ONLY covers infringement on free speech by the government.

        • 34t

          He mentioned a specific law (the 1964 Civil Rights Act), and I corrected him about what that law said. That’s not a first ammendment argument, it’s an application of a specific anti-descrimination law.

          Secondly, there is a difference between not being allowed to take action against someone due to their beliefs, and not having to offer people a private platform for their beliefs. For example, if I refused to sell a house to a pirate party member because they were a pirate (unless they agreed to limit all political speech), that would be actionable discrimination and suppression of free speech. That is because that would be a public service offered to anyone. This is not the same thing. This is a private contract, entered into by invitation, without openings to the public.

          Forcing people to accommodate people they dislike or who they think will be harmful (as they can very reasonably believe that the Pirate party will be harmful to their business, not through their actions but through the controversy surrounding their presence) is an authoritarian measure.

          Freedom means accepting that people won’t act morally. That’s the situation here.

        • 34t

          He mentioned a specific law (the 1964 Civil Rights Act), and I corrected him about what that law said. That’s not a first ammendment argument, it’s an application of a specific anti-descrimination law.

          Secondly, there is a difference between not being allowed to take action against someone due to their beliefs, and not having to offer people a private platform for their beliefs. For example, if I refused to sell a house to a pirate party member because they were a pirate (unless they agreed to limit all political speech), that would be actionable discrimination and suppression of free speech. That is because that would be a public service offered to anyone. This is not the same thing. This is a private contract, entered into by invitation, without openings to the public.

          Forcing people to accommodate people they dislike or who they think will be harmful (as they can very reasonably believe that the Pirate party will be harmful to their business, not through their actions but through the controversy surrounding their presence) is an authoritarian measure.

          Freedom means accepting that people won’t act morally. That’s the situation here.

      • Guest

        Ven, Gamex tried to get TSPP (The Swedish Pirate Party) to attend for months.
        After TSPP agreed and paid for a both and other stuff, Gamex even used TSPP in advertisements.

        TSPP does fit with the gaming crowd since file sharing and the other things TSPP is trying to legalize or support is rather relevant to a lot of gamers.
        The Swedish Social Democratic Youth League (SSU) are being allowed to appear, even though they aren’t exactly gamer material.
        So don’t say it’s because they TSPP doesn’t fit at a gaming expo.

        As to the possibility that a 3rd party told them to violate the contract they made to get rid of TSPP or else they’d pull out, it’s possible, but it’s also called Blackmail. A reputable group would have refused such a demand, and probably publicized it and/or called the police. And before you say it’s just a boycott, no, it’s not. I’m not a lawyer, but I do know that when you use your position of power and money to try and force someone to cancel a contract when there is no valid reason for that contract to be cancel, it falls into the illegal category. (Businesses and their contracts aren’t the same as individual consumers and their purchasing decisions.)

        • Ven

          A couple of things:

          - TSPP may fit at gaming expos, but Gamex decided they didn’t fit at theirs. The business decisions that Gamex made to reach that conclusion are theirs to make, regardless of if they had previously supported TSPP attending.
          - It is not blackmail to offer Gamex an “It’s them or me” ultimatum. Blackmail regards hidden information that you threaten to make public COMBINED with a demand for something. In this case, businesses would simply require certain conditions to be met or else they will not attend. This is more closely defined as a business negotiation.

        • Bill

          When talking about legalities, you need to be a bit more informed before you talk. If this ever comes up for you, and you call the police about a similar action, prepare to be laughed at. A lot. What the expo did was not illegal. If they received pressure from other participants to kick the pp out, that too is not illegal. Any pressure they do receive is no different than you personally sending the expo a letter stating “Allow the PP in or I will boycott your expo”.

          Breaking a contract, btw, is NEVER illegal. You do not go to jail for violating a contract, it is a civil matter, not legal.

          The best recourse the PP could have here would be to sue the organizers of the expo for breach of contract in CIVIL court. Since no doubt their contract with the expo gives the expo a way out (which they obviously took), the PP’s claim would lie somewhere along the lines of a Breach of Covenant of Good Faith; the argument being: The PP incurred expenses in the attempt to fulfill their side of the contract (employees need to plan the event, hire help, buy supplies, plane tickets, hotels, etc) under the Good Faith assumption that the PP was welcome at the event. The expo, at the last minute, declared the PP was not welcome for reasons that the expo was aware of beforehand, thus negating the possibility of the PP using the same time & money to advertise elsewhere.

          Of course this is based on my knowledge of US law. For all I know spitting on a contract in Sweden gets you shot.

    • Anonymous

      So if a sex-toy manufacturer wanted to have a booth at the gaming show the people running it should let them? It’s not discrimination unless the Pirate Party was fundamental to gaming. They don’t make games, they aren’t a distributor, they don’t make hardware…they are a political party.

      Having said that, I agree with their agenda. I have been to many industry tradeshows from E3 to COMDEX to CES and yes, even the AVN Expo in Las Vegas. Political parties don’t belong anywhere near them. Special Interest groups maybe, but not full on political parties.

      If anything, they should try and host a panel or a keynote and weave their message into it that way. Maybe host a party after the show like some companies do. You don’t have to be at the actual tradeshow to participate if you are smart.

      If they want booth space it’s simple. Make a game.

      • RIAAtarded

        No I meant what I typed which was discrimination. It isn’t interchangeable with bigotry. Here is my question. If it was such an issue why granted access in the first place, sure you can claim it is industry only but you allowed them to signup, printed all the advertising for it then at the last minute change their minds citing concerns over appearance. Why? The pirate parties mandate doesn’t support piracy despite the applied assumption based on their name they are supporting rational changes to the law not the draconian industry based standard that is proposed. I can think of no better venue then an industry conference to have a dialogue on such matters as the very people who voted these guy in are the consumers of the gaming industry. It should speak volumes to them that if the majority is supporting change in a different manner maybe we as an industry should look at alternatives.

        As to the sex toy comment you’re reaching for an extreme as I’m unaware of anything gaming related about them at least not in this sense anyway. The view politics has nothing to do with gaming and no right to be there you’re wrong. I’ve got a bill before my house now that proves that to the contrary. Industry stops lobbying for heavier copyright laws and big brother access to all my online activities then I’ll consider the 2 separate. Until then I’ll consider the 2 linked.

      • Lulz

        I think all of you are missing a very important piece of information here…

        “Troberg says that after the sales people from the exhibition pursued the party for months to participate, they decided to book and pay for a booth. Not only that, the party also agreed to a package of advertising and hotel rooms.”

        THEY WERE PURSUED TO PARTICIPATE. They did not seek out and solicit the exhibition, they were asked and then dropped flat at the last minute.

        • Anonymous

          Yes I saw that. Did the same sales people pursue all of the political groups? Probably not. My bet is that the sales people were a little overly aggressive and under informed.

      • Guest

        If the gameshow asked the sex-toy manufacturer to attend, took their money, and advertised that they would be there, they yes they should have a F-N booth!

        Remember, this isn’t just some group off the street trying to horn in, they were pursued by Gamex for months before they finally agreed and subsequently paid for that booth.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FCNK7C55CBUYFVSC5LNWKB322E Buglord

      saying it is a miracle humans made it to the top of the food chain is like saying it’s a miracle that a aimboter with godmod always gets headshots and seems to be unkillable. if you don’t play by the rules ofc you’re going to win. thinking more about it’s even more right metaphor or whatever you call it, aimboters with godmod most likely use 3rd party software to do what they do, just like humans need to have un-natural things to do just about anything. (assume un-natural as what you can’t make within 1 generation from what you find naturally occurring locally where you live)

      • 34t

        … Is there a problem with using “unnatural” things? I mean, animals build and use tools too. We’re just better at doing it.

  • Anonymous Sweden

    Remember we have our eyes on you and shut out Piratpartitet have received our attention on you.

    We are Anonymous.
    We are Legion.
    We do not forgive.
    We do not forget.
    EXPECT US

    • Gooks

      How silly.

    • Guest

      That first sentence is very poorly formed.
      Not at all like the statements made by Anonymous.
      You obviously aren’t one of their representatives.

      Too bad, Gamex could probably use a digital spanking.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Jones/841078811 David Jones

    I honestly don’t see why anyone is surprised about this. Maybe I missed something but piracy (of which I am guilty) is a thorn in the side of movie studios, game developers, musical artists, etc. I really don’t understand why people are shocked when the pirates are asked not to attend a gaming convention. The thing that does shock me is that they were invited in the first place.

    • Anonymous

      The only real surprise was that they were invited in the first place. It is hard to say why but either they had inside support or this was some mistake.

      It is clear enough what happened next when all these other businesses read their name on the attendance list.

      What is clear though is that this Swedish Pirate Party won’t leave so easily even if they are not invited inside. A nice event for Anonymous as well it seems.

    • Floppy Copy

      It’s only piracy until the laws change, which it will some day. Or were talking about the one-eyed, peg legged, parrot on the shoulder variety? Bah, stupid derogatory term…

      • Floppy Copy

        PS: Note to self, don’t write comments immediately after waking up. :-/

  • Drees

    why not setup a tent outside the event ?

  • http://twitter.com/m_cgn Mike Nolte

    gamescom in Cologne, Germany doesn’t allow the Pirate Party Germany to have a booth either. So produced 5000 flyers, 5000 stickers and 10000 1-inch-diameter Pirate Party buttons and handed them out to gamers. We had planned being there for 4 full days but ran out of material after 2 and a half days. If they don’t give us a booth in 2012 we’ll be back with twice as many people and 5 times as many flyers and stickers.

    Best regards,
    Mike Nolte
    General Secretary
    Pirate Party Cologne
    Germany

    • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

      And thus they provided much more publicity than you could ever have achieved alone.

      It’s ppl like these (the Pirates) that makes it less shameful to be a human being nowadays.

  • http://twitter.com/m_cgn Mike Nolte

    gamescom in Cologne, Germany doesn’t allow the Pirate Party Germany to have a booth either. So produced 5000 flyers, 5000 stickers and 10000 1-inch-diameter Pirate Party buttons and handed them out to gamers. We had planned being there for 4 full days but ran out of material after 2 and a half days. If they don’t give us a booth in 2012 we’ll be back with twice as many people and 5 times as many flyers and stickers.

    Best regards,
    Mike Nolte
    General Secretary
    Pirate Party Cologne
    Germany

  • Guest123

    This isn’t really surprising. Piracy evokes strong emotions on both sides, and that sparks controversy. As any good businessman knows, controversy is not good for business. And developing games is a business. Really, I’m surprised they even thought about letting them attend. Seems like that would be vetoed right off the bat, just because of the threat that any controversy could pose for business.

    It is kind of a dick move that the Party was dropped after having been pursued to join. That aspect of this does not shine well on the event-planners.

    In a side note, It’s important to note that this is not censorship because it isn’t the suppression of public communication. It’s the refusal to accommodate a group at a private event. You can still call it somewhat discriminatory (and it is, but you can also debate whether that’s justified or not), but it’s not censorship.

    • No

      Controversy can be great for business. Example: The Media.

      • Guest123

        Not for all business. Ask the NFL. Anytime they get some controversy, their profits tank. Their reaction, naturally, is to ban anything that could cause controversy.

        Controversy works for the media because it encourages people to read the papers and watch the news so that they can know about the controversy. It doesn’t work for many production businesses because being associated with any controversy can sour someone’s opinion of their products.

      • Guest123

        Not for all business. Ask the NFL. Anytime they get some controversy, their profits tank. Their reaction, naturally, is to ban anything that could cause controversy.

        Controversy works for the media because it encourages people to read the papers and watch the news so that they can know about the controversy. It doesn’t work for many production businesses because being associated with any controversy can sour someone’s opinion of their products.

    • Anonynony

      It is censorship when you are offered a public platform to voice political concerns, only to have it taken away at the eleventh hour.

      • Guest123

        It’s still a platform at a private event, not a public one. It’s not censorship.

        The organizers are jackasses because they pulled back a previously offered platform, but that doesn’t mean they’re engaging in censorship. This just doesn’t fit the criteria, even if it was done in what arguably may be the same spirit.

        • Amangaka7

          Sony created a monster…

  • Anon

    Sounds like someone from the media industry pressured Gamex to kick the Pirate Party out, otherwise they wouldn’t have invited them in the first place.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

      It’s almost a certainty. Most likely there were some big game companies who said “if you want our business and participation in this and future events, you will not host the Pirate Party.”

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the organizers remain quiet, but it wouldn’t hurt to contact them and ask exactly who was behind this and what threats and doomsday predictions they made.

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        We could receive the expected reply: MAFIAA. But I’m not that naive. They’d probably give some lame excuse to hide the political and financial motives behind this decision.

  • http://webstravaganza.com Eric Lortie

    It’s frustrating that so many people don’t take the time to

    • ZiggySig

      Yep, sadly the name is quite a burden. I was thinking the other day, how would a Pirate Party be greeted where I live. With the average age being reasonably high, and the majority of population being rather poorly educated… the only thing you can hope for, is to attract more new young voters.

      • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

        Attract new young voters is enough for starters. Old voters die and in the future they’ll have critical mass to implode the current system. From inside.

        The name may be a burden but being a left-winged party used to be a burden in the past. So, yeah…

    • Tim

      @Eric
      I agree with you but if would be better if you stopped using the word theft to describe infringement. There’s enough propaganda already out there. There’s no such thing as theft of intellectual property because there is no property to begin with, let alone intellectual.

      You want to know what is theft? Copyright is theft. Stealing from the public domain for years. And it’s about time we turn the tables.

      • http://webstravaganza.com Eric Lortie

        In saying “there is no property to begin with” are you indicating that you believe that nothing anywhere belongs to anyone? I’d like some clarification on that statement if possible, as your response would drastically change my comment.

        • Nop

          Not ‘property’, but ‘intellectual property’, genius.

        • Nop

          Not ‘property’, but ‘intellectual property’, genius.

        • http://webstravaganza.com Eric Lortie

          @Nop: Really, are you sure that’s what he meant? Because I’ve had this conversation with people before where I thought we’ve been speaking about intellectual property and they’ve meant all property.

          I’d rather ask a question and be certain that proceed into a conversation that is a waste of my time.

          For the record, I disagree with the assertion that intellectual property doesn’t belong to anyone. I feel that a balance should be achieved. People who say all intellectual property belongs to everyone crap on the rights of creators and stifle creativity and people who grasp firmly on IP with an iron fist stifle creativity just as much.

          Oh, and internet sarcasm? That’s new and exciting. I bet you just invented it. You should patent it before someone pirates it.

          Genius.

        • Anony

          ^^^^^^^
          This comment consists of win.

        • Anony

          ^^^^^^^
          This comment consists of win.

        • Tim

          @Eric,
          I meant intellectual property is not real property. If you google the subject you’ll find articles (pro and against). I think IP is a violation of real property. Think of the consequences applied to software, or sciences like medicine. I’ve created a new method for a specific heart surgery problem I’m not going to share unless everybody pays me a royalty. That kind of bullshit has catastrophic consequences. We, as a civilization, got to where we are because we shared knowledge, discoveries, from how to make fire to how to decode the human genome.

          IP is getting out of control. Monsanto has patented genes, which is absurd, and considering how the US Supreme Court is ruling (corporations are people, really?), soon there will be human genes patented. IP is obstructing development and innovation and fucking everybody along the way.

          I’d recommend anyone who want to read about these subjects to take a look at techdirt. We all need to get informed so we can fight back.

          And back to the original semantics issue, it’s infringement, not stealing. But you probably knew that already.

        • http://webstravaganza.com Eric Lortie

          @tim I definitely agree with you about how it’s getting out of control. I don’t know how to curtail it without shifting exactly the same distance in the opposite direction, but I totally feel that the best answer for human growth involves finding a balance between the two extremes.

          If I had to chose between one extreme or the other I’d definitely chose the opposite end of the spectrum of where we currently are, but I don’t think being in a situation where you’re forced to choose between extremes benefits anyone but a small few. And often, those few are the ones responsible for orchestrating the events to begin with, because they knew the outcome would benefit them.

          The above paragraph doesn’t apply specific to the issue of IP, but damn near every human interaction.

      • ThumbsUpThumbsDown

        Having taken note of the downside as you do here, I’ve concluded that what the Pirate Parties need is not so much a new or different name; but, greater self understanding that what they claim to pirate is not product, but the return of essential and exalted human rights to the earliest reversion of intellectual property to the publick domain.

        It should be clear to us intuitively that this essential self-understanding is a priori to any effective efforts on our part to
        transform how copyright laws are understood in any of our democracies; and, ultimately, in any of the legislatures. Why? Because what has hitherto sabotaged our efforts to persuasively expose Copyright Laws as a legislatively mandated hundred year hijacking of the publick domain, is not our name; but, the lack of coherent clarity within, and omong us, as to how our meaning of piracy differs from the wholesale political disenfranchisement and the wholesale misappropriation of publick wealth by private interests represented by the copyright laws.

        Do we ever hear Big Copyright Content proclaiming its orgasmic joy that no intellectual property will ever return to the publick domain? Are they ever heard offering Big Thanks for whatever luck or sleight of hand has reduced their digital costs of distribution to zero and kept the resulting Big Profits from the pockets of their customers? Do we ever hear Big Legislators proclaiming their gratitude to Big Content for those Big Campaign Contributions?

        Yet, these powers stand every day on their moral shitpile and in choral unison, accuse us of criminal theft and moral degeneracy.

        I say that we have every opportunity and right to criticize this copyright disgrace with moral clarity and with political effectiveness; but, we wll not rise to such a goal one second before we have better understood these values within ourselves.

      • Fredrika

        > “I agree with you but if would be better if you stopped using the word theft to describe infringement.”

        I’m not sure it’s copyright infringement he’s talking about in his text. If it is, he’s obviously using the terminology wrong, but he might speak of a different aspect of the copyright monopoly’s effect, and if so, he’s using the term theft correct, but it’s hard to make out.

        You however are definitely way of in the following comment:

        > “There’s no such thing as theft of intellectual property because there is no property to begin with, let alone intellectual.”

        Actually, there is something called intellectual property, but that unfortunatley misleading term does not refer to the intellectual work in itself, i.e. the song, the movie or the book. It refers to the copyright monopoly, that controls the use of an intellectual work.

        The copyright monopoly is a piece of intellectual property, or intangible property, and it does indeed constitute property, property that can be owned(initially by the author), sold, or stolen, although that’s very rare, i assume.

        This is what Eric might be speaking of, the fact that the way the current copyright laws work, they are not serving the author or society, but the large publishers, which through their lobbying and large collection of copyright monopoly’s, create a oligopoly market and situation with unnecessary barriers for creators and creation, that in many ways forces authors to sell their monopoly to the publishers, to have any chance of making any money from their works, or to even be able to make them in the first place.

        .
        > “You want to know what is theft? Copyright is theft. Stealing from the public domain for years. And it’s about time we turn the tables.”

        There however you are definitely right, the copyright monopoly does perform what could be described as theft, of the public’s physical property. That’s the core function of the copyright monopoly.

  • Pingback: Too Controversial: Pirate Party Banned From Gaming Exhibition | Links Daily

  • Guest


    I honestly don’t see why anyone is surprised about this. Maybe I missed something but piracy (of which I am guilty) is a thorn in the side of movie studios,
    game developers, musical artists, etc. I really don’t understand why people are shocked when the pirates are asked not to attend a gaming convention. The
    thing that does shock me is that they were invited in the first place.

    Except that the party does not itself violate the law. The party wants to change the law.
    Inviting an organization who breaks the law is clearly inconsistent with the gaming convention, but how can working for changing the law be a problem?

    The only reasonable conclusion is that someone with power thinks that certain political views — working for a change in the law is a thorn in the side of the participants.

    • Anonymous

      I agree, that is what is seems like. And that is exactly why i do not understand it. Looking at Steam, WoW, Xbox Live, ect they have already found ways around piracy. Earning more by offering more.

      I would understand this (stupid and transparent) powerplay (by whoever did it) if it was some movie convention. You know, the people who aren’t smart enough to adapt. And even then, refusing the other political view, refusing open debate…

      Sounds like a scared 10 year old who is doesn’t want to admit he is scared?

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » Too Controversial: Pirate Party Banned From Gaming Exhibition

  • Not Guilty
  • Tmc80tmc

    Well, I think it’s nice to have an organisation dedicated to telling companies like Sony to go scratch their ass with a broken bottle when it comes to making profit off the content released on their $300-$700 game console…

  • https://thepiratebay.org/user/manOtor/ manOtor

    Well, as soon as the big guys behind the exclusion get sick of giving The Pirate Party free promotion and realize they can’t prevent them from being outside ridiculing the big players inside by their mere presence, they’ll probably sit down and talk.

    It just needs a clever marketing-guy who realizes that it is good for business to show the gamers (the big player’s main income source) that the industry takes their customers worries about privacy and need for easier excess to content seriously.
    Looking at the growing numbers of Pirate Party members, I think this will happen rather sooner than later.
    I’d bet a million that the first company that would actually initiate talks with the Pirate Party, maybe even consult them in privacy/distribution issues, would have a notable boost in sales when advertising it.

    Until then the only plausible cause of action is what they are already doing:
    Be present outside the gaming exhibitions with loads of material making people aware of the issues at hand. What better ground to find future party members that wouldn’t show much political interest otherwise anyway?
    (Btw. Another very good example of “big players” missing opportunities through ignoring the technological development of our society, this time regarding the political theater and it’s participants ;)….)

    Way to go, Pirate Party! Keep it up :)!

  • Anonymous

    Isn’t Markus Persson a member of that group? I should would be interesting if one of Sweden’s own flagships for gaming didn’t attend because he was a member of the pirate party.

  • lakfja

    Excuse me while I don’t give a damn.

  • Guest

    Bad news.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PXX4S66KOUIGIKTTIMV3CBGO7Y Colin

    Streisland Effect anybody?

    I still think the Pirate Party should get back all their money from the show’s organisers.

  • http://openid-provider.appspot.com/hugo.forss Arakun

    Bear Wengse? Lol. I smell some Google translate. His name is Björn Wengse.

  • No

    The Pirate Party isn’t a game company, so why should they be at this event? Are any other political parties attending?

    End of the day it’s a private event, they can invite/accept who they want.

  • Anonymous

    Now thats gonna be really interesting to see how that all turns out.
    complete-privacy.us.tc

  • Jimbo

    to me it’s the typical situation of only one side being allowed to put it’s point of view. if a different point of view cant be sensibly argued against, the only option is to silence that point of view in any way possible. that has been achieved here by threats to the organisers who haven’t had the balls to say ‘all are welcome here. if one party disagrees with another, discuss things. come to an agreement but dont threaten the existence of the exhibition’. how many times have the entertainment industries gone to extremes to get what they want?

  • Jaime Pecora

    geez, i always ear people pirating games lol

    http://adf.ly/3bLu1

  • Pingback: Pirates Unwelcome At Swedish Games Expo | Kotaku Australia

  • Pingback: Pirates Unwelcome at Swedish Games Expo | Gaming Mania

  • Anonymous

    Disqus needs a friggin dislike button. Sure, I could write a well reasoned response as to why I think someone is incorrect, but that’s like, effort, man. I just want to voice my discontent with a button click.

  • Confusedasalways
  • Pingback: Pirates Unwelcome at Swedish Games Expo [Ruh Roh] | Defui News Source

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    … and so this stupid copywrong war continues and escalates as casualties pile up on both sides.

    But the real casualty is the unknowing bystander called FREEDOM.

  • Pingback: Varning för politiskt inlägg: Svagt gjort av Gamex

  • Anonymous

    tinyurl.com/3j5ovpk

  • Pingback: El Partido Pirata fue baneado de una exposición de juegos en Suecia | Tecnocápsulas

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    tinyurl.com/3j5ovpk

  • Pingback: Gamex Pulls The Welcome Mat Out From Under The Pirate Party « waweru.net

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • 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...

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.