US Pirate Party Docks in California

Ernesto
January 29, 2009
109
pirate-party
Print

In Europe, Pirate Parties have quite a following, especially in Sweden where a political scientist recently described them as a “classic civil right movement”. The U.S. Pirate Party hopes to replicate some of this success, and officially launched in California today, the home of the movie industry.

California, the place where Hollywood stars become Governor s. The place where movie pirates, led by William Fox, once fled to in order to escape the licensing fees Thomas Edison demanded for inventing the motion picture camera. More than a century later the tables have turned

Fox is no longer a pirate in the 20th century, but one of the big players in the motion picture industry. Similarly, Hollywood is no longer a hiding place for pirates, but the home of the MPAA. The people who once successfully moved from New York to the wild west in order to escape licensing fees, are now the ones who go after a new branch of pirates – for stealing their work.

Luckily, the U.S. is still a democracy, and the U.S. Pirate Party has now set course to the golden state. In California, the party aims to be recognized by the State Secretary in the months to come. In order to do so, the party has to collect 88,991 signatures within 15 months. A tough challenge, but not impossible according to Glenn Kerbein, chairman of the party.

Indeed, hundreds and thousands of Americans – especially the more tech savvy ones – realize that stricter copyright laws are not the silver bullet that will stop piracy. They believe we have to stand up for Net Neutrality and protect our privacy. However, mobilizing all these people to register as a Pirate is easier said then done.

The goals of the party are clear though. “Frankly, we feel that the RIAA and MPAA’s ruthless campaign of suing their own customers out of their livelihoods must cease immediately. The terrible litigation facing international bodies (ACTA) must see the light of day, and the DMCA must be repealed,” they write.

Previously, the Pirate Party has tried to get recognized in Utah, but they got stuck on 1400 of the 2000 needed signatures. Nothing is impossible though, in Sweden half of all Swedish men under 30 said they would consider voting for the Pirate Party, while the youth chapter received $160,000 in funding from the government. There’s still hope, even though change has already come.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

There have been third parties in the past of the United States that have had some impact nationally but not many. I can count them from my hand: free soil party, know-nothing party, constitution-union party, populist party, progressive party, the dixiecrats, and perhaps the social-ist party as well. The plurality system is not exactly conducive to third parties, since it encourages coalition-forming and thus into a two-party system. I know that on the state and local level, though, things can work differently, but still with little impact: for example, there were once the greenbacks. Yet, I am still not confident that any political third party could make that much of an impact in the United States – especially when most of the people who are in favor of privacy and file-sharing and The Pirate Bay &c. (about half of Americans) have no particular strong feelings about it. Last time, in Utah, the number of signatures failed to be reached due to interference from the Libertarian Party.

Roze
http://www.10ch.org
- Kid L
  
  You are right, if something is to be done it needs to be done more as a public organization. That or we can all pool together and hire some lobbyists.
- http://intensedebate.com/people/NubCakes NubCakes
  
  Yes, but the point is this: you can either do nothing but complain in blogs and to friends etc. – which achieves precisely nothing as far as getting legislation changed – or you can start a new political party with the chance that one day you will have some form of political power with which to effect change in legislation.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    with the chance that one day you will have some form of political power with which to effect change in legislation
    The chance that a political third party could could be that significant in the United States is slim, in my opinion. As it stands, I think that something more effective needs to be done.
    
    Unfortunately for myself, I have no good idea on what people could do more effectively, but I think that it is important to come up with a good idea, a better idea than starting a political party. The most important thing to note is that at least 10% of the population of the United States are undecided in their opinion on whether file-sharing of copyrighted content should be legal or illegal, and one important thing is to win them over, and then perhaps also to win over the 45% of people who think that file-sharing should be illegal. The power of the vote is important to utilize, but I think that there needs to be a better way than starting a political third party in the United States. Thus, I say, perhaps we can all try to think on this, and maybe I, or somebody else, might come up with a good idea.
    - jjtripp
      
      The fact remains that "WE THE PEOPLE" are supposed to be in control. I am not a pirate, as far as I can remember back, I have NEVER downloaded an illegal file. I just believe that if you want to use the internet to publicize your work, you should also expect people to not only view your work, but, also to use your work in their own projects. If I spend my time to look at what your latest, greatest project is, you should give me licence to try and expand on it!
      To all the people out there that do download files that "ARE NOT AVAILABLE" to most people….MORE POWER TO YOU! I just have never found the need to download questionable content.
      No matter what you think, feel or even believe, they are taking RIGHTS from us when they expect us to be touchie, feelie over their ip, but yet, not want tro put our 2 cents in.
      n00b to this forum, hope not to get flamed, but, this is my belief…. BTW, have volunteered.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      I am with you. I do not download often myself, but I am sick of the idea that the copyright holders (meaning the industry) ought to have control of all transmission of information and communication that has copyrighted content in them. Who are they so arrogant to think that it is right that they can command what people do in the communication and transmission of information that could have copyrighted content in it? Who are they so arrogant to think that they ought to have the right to restrict people's right to communicate and transmit information to each other not only because it is copyrighted or has the possibility of being copyrighted? Copyright, the taking away of the right to communicate and transmit information merely because the information is copyrighted, is the massive censorship of our time in the supposed free world, a great threat to the freedom of speech.
      
      The industry has gained control over all communication and transmission of information that could transmit copyrighted information, and we the people need to gain the control back. The vote is the means by which this can be done.
    - jjtripp
      
      Roze, I am an artist, best thing in the world that could happen to me is that someone on the net would discover my music! I truly wait for the day that I can release my music in the wild, know that thousands of people are out there listening!
      I have a full time job, do not ever expect to be a ROCKSTAR!
      I want to just know someone is listening.
      To hear all these jerks in the media just amazes and exasperates me!
      You start this career just hoping that one day someone WANTS to hear you!
      I don't understand how any "artist" can be behind this.
    - fr33tard
      
      i can understand how a hobbyist such as yourself would be content just to have a bunch of non-paying fans.
      
      what i don't understand is how you can't accept that some artists actually want to make a living doing what they love…
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      Copyright does not enable artists to make a living. Why don't you come up with evidence that people pay due to copyright? A Gallup poll has shown that copyright makes no difference in whether people pay or not, for the vast majority of people.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      Copyright does not enable artists to make a living. The only thing it does is control, not ensuring an income. Why don't you come up with evidence that people pay due to copyright? A Gallup poll has shown that copyright makes no difference in whether people pay or not, for the vast majority of people.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      I am with you. I do not download often myself, but I am sick of the idea that the copyright holders (meaning the industry) ought to have control of all transmission of information and communication that has copyrighted content in them. Who are they to think that it is right that they can so arrogantly command what people do in the communication and transmission of information that could have copyrighted content in it? Who are they to think that they ought to have the right to restrict people's right to communicate and transmit information to each other not only because it is copyrighted or has the possibility of being copyrighted? Copyright, the taking away of the right to communicate and transmit information merely because the information is copyrighted, is the massive censorship of our time, a great threat to the freedom of speech.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      I am with you. I do not download often myself, but I am sick of the idea that the copyright holders (meaning the industry) ought to have control of all transmission of information and communication that has copyrighted content in them. Who are they so arrogant to think that it is right that they can command what people do in the communication and transmission of information that could have copyrighted content in it? Who are they so arrogant to think that they ought to have the right to restrict people's right to communicate and transmit information to each other not only because it is copyrighted or has the possibility of being copyrighted? Copyright, the taking away of the right to communicate and transmit information merely because the information is copyrighted, is the massive censorship of our time in the supposed free world, a great threat to the freedom of speech.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    with the chance that one day you will have some form of political power with which to effect change in legislation
    The chance that a political party could be that significant is slim, in my opinion. As it stands, I think that something more effective needs to be done.
    
    Unfortunately for myself, I have no good idea on what people could do more effectively, but I think that it is important to come up with a good idea, a better idea than starting a political party. The most important thing to note is that at least 20% of the population of the United States are undecided in their opinion on whether file-sharing of copyrighted content should be legal or illegal, and one important thing is to win them over, and then perhaps also to win over the 45% of people who think that file-sharing should be illegal. The power of the vote is important to utilize, but I think that there needs to be a better way. Thus, I say, perhaps we can all try to think, and maybe I, or somebody else, might come up with a good idea.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    with the chance that one day you will have some form of political power with which to effect change in legislation
    The chance that a political third party could could be that significant in the United States is slim, in my opinion. As it stands, I think that something more effective needs to be done.
    
    Unfortunately for myself, I have no good idea on what people could do more effectively, but I think that it is important to come up with a good idea, a better idea than starting a political party. The most important thing to note is that at least 20% of the population of the United States are undecided in their opinion on whether file-sharing of copyrighted content should be legal or illegal, and one important thing is to win them over, and then perhaps also to win over the 45% of people who think that file-sharing should be illegal. The power of the vote is important to utilize, but I think that there needs to be a better way. Thus, I say, perhaps we can all try to think, and maybe I, or somebody else, might come up with a good idea.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

There have been third parties in the past of the United States that have had some impact nationally but not many. I can count them from my hand: free soil party, know-nothing party, constitution-union party, populist party, progressive party, and perhaps the socialist party as well. I know that on the state level, though, things can work differently, but still with little impact: for example, there were once the greenbacks. Yet, I am still not confident that any political third party could make that much of an impact in the United States – especially when the roughly half of Americans who are against the have no particular strong feelings about it. Last time, in Utah, the number of signatures failed to be reached due to interference from the Libertarian Party.

Roze
http://www.10ch.org
http://intensedebate.com/people/RoestVrijStaal RoestVrijStaal

Go US Pirate Party! Go!
Turn the evil Anti-Piracy seed into a costumer-friendly tree!
I hope the American voters also see that the MAFIAA is decreasing their privacy and rights and vote on the USPP.
fr33tard

"“Frankly, we feel that the RIAA and MPAA’s ruthless campaign of suing their own customers out of their livelihoods must cease immediately."

if you consume without compensation you are not a "customer". on the contrary, you are merely a freeloader, merely a freetard.
- http://intensedebate.com/people/NubCakes NubCakes
  
  Funny that the article has the line "the ones who go after a new branch of pirates – for stealing their work."
  
  Stealing.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    I agree, perhaps the wording would have been better if it were different, or if scare quotes were to be inserted.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/RoestVrijStaal RoestVrijStaal

Go US Pirate Party! Go!
Turn the evil Anti-Piracy seed into a costumer-friendly tree!
I hope the American voters also see that the MAFIAA is decreasing their privacy and rights and vote on the USPP.
The party could also clean the negative anti-p2p image of the US if they in gov and make the laws of copyright and intellectual property looser.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

On that, you are incorrect. Sharing is sharing, not freeloading.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

You, sir, are incorrect. Sharing is sharing, sir, not freeloading, sir.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

You, sir, are incorrect. Sir, sharing is sharing, sir, not freeloading, sir.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

You, sir, are incorrect, sir. Sir, sharing is sharing, sir, not freeloading, sir.
http://intensedebate.com/people/RoestVrijStaal RoestVrijStaal

That's right, however from the other hand, when the Music and Movie studio's used DRM, more customers were affected than freeloaders or freetards…
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

You, sir, are incorrect, sir. Sir, sharing is sharing, sir, not freeloading, sir. Sir, for example sir, showing a movie, sir, is not freeloading, sir.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

You, sir, are incorrect, sir. Sir, sharing is sharing, sir, not freeloading, sir. Sir, for example sir, showing a movie, sir, to one's friends, sir, is not freeloading, sir.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/RoestVrijStaal RoestVrijStaal

That's right, however from the other hand, when the Music and Movie studio's used DRM, more customers were affected than freeloaders or freetards…

And most of the money goes to the CEO's of the studio's, the real artists get just a one or 2 little bucks…
chronoss

you invite twenty people to your house
they watch a movie

invite them back every day and any day, totally not illegal and not wrong.
The thing is instead just copy them one and let them watch it at there convience,

The act of copying it is what htey hate, SO ok. DONT copy it.
Setup a stream server and let htem watch at will.
OH but then they have a problem with that, what then is hte differance of me having them over and watching it anyways.

There isn't……
and they know it.
so i have 1 million friends. It is 999999 more then they have……
- http://intensedebate.com/people/NubCakes NubCakes
  
  That's a totally unreasonable analogy you just made.
  
  You dont have 1 million friends, your making content available to anybody to download. You don't know them, they couldn't give a shit about you and vice-versa. You would not let a total stranger who walked off the street into your house to view a movie.
  
  I'm sick of this "because I share with my friends that I know and it's legal then filesharing is legal". It's a ridiculous argument and is only bandied about by people hellbent on justifying what they do to themselves and others who don't want to acknowledge what is really happening. If the pirate party tried to argue a line like this they would be laughed at.
  
  Under current legislation you are breaking copyright law by transmitting reproductions. I do it, the differnece between me and you is I don't try to justify it with weak analogies that involve non-existent facts. Like "friends".
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    You would not let a total stranger who walked off the street into your house to view a movie.
    But perhaps in public, one would. Besides, one could have a party at one's house where people can randomly wander in. You are mistaken in the view that there is only one definition of a "friend," and a friend is not necessarily someone one would trust to invite into one's own home, or that one would necessarily need to be intimate with someone in order to trust someone to access to one's home.
    
    It is certainly not an unreasonable analogy, because "friend" means "assistant or ally" and when one shares a movie or something like that to people, one is certainly being friendly to people. Sharing, after all, is a friendly act, and this must not be forgotten.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    You would not let a total stranger who walked off the street into your house to view a movie.
    But perhaps in public, one would. Besides, one could have a party at one's house where people can randomly wander in. You are mistaken in the view that there is only one definition of a "friend," and a friend is not necessarily someone one would trust to invite into one's own home, or that one would necessarily need to be intimate with someone in order to trust someone to access to one's home.
    
    It is certainly not an unreasonable analogy, because "friend" means "assistant or ally" (at least in one sense) and when one shares a movie or something like that to people, one is certainly being friendly to people. Sharing, after all, is a friendly act, and this must not be forgotten.
  - @NubCakes
    "I'm sick of this "because I share with my friends that I know and it's legal then filesharing is legal"".
    
    It's legal to share copyrighted material with 20 people by inviting them over to my house to watch a movie every day, but give them each a copy of the movie and now all of a sudden it's wrong? That's bullshit.
    
    Hmm… You somehow interpreted "because I share with my friends that I know and it's legal then filesharing is legal" from that?
    
    Tell me, did you hear a whooshing noise when the point flew over your head?
    - fr33tard
      
      It's legal to share copyrighted material with 20 people by inviting them over to my house to watch a movie every day, but give them each a copy of the movie and now all of a sudden it's wrong? That's bullshit.
      ———————————————————————–
      
      only someone truly deluded could fail to see the difference between a single viewing that depends on the hospitality of a single person and having your own copy (that you didn't pay for) which you can view however many times, whenever you want in the comfort of your own home…
  - CHRONOSS
    
    actually i do have a million friends
    if you'd like ill start and buy years end ill get there nick names and list them all.
    unlike you i actually have spent thousands of hours helping people in chats and thousands more meeting talking and YES making loads a friends and if i share to that friend and he shares to another why would i not consider his friend to be my friend.
    
    Thus we have the multitude of whats known as COMMONALITY.
    we are a community that as it walks the streets of the net we are friendly and say hi as we pass. It is no less different than saying hi as you pass your neighbors and no less different then smiling and saying have a wonderful day.
    
    and under current Canadian law i am breaking no laws, there is a levy that is in place and i would argue that the current laws have no benefit to society and that the copyright laws were originally formed to give the artist SOME compensation NOT keep me from enjoying the art at there set of costs.
    
    It is narrow minded and short sited to see the economic loss hollywood has incurred upon us all and like the NHL hockey players , they should get a lot less for there doings and as one person said at slash dot , it is not art anymore it is nothing more then a business. That is why artistic movies and music rarely see the light and if they do its rare.
  - CHRONOSS
    
    actually i do have a million friends
    if you'd like ill start and buy years end ill get there nick names and list them all.
    unlike you i actually have spent thousands of hours helping people in chats and thousands more meeting talking and YES making loads a friends and if i share to that friend and he shares to another why would i not consider his friend to be my friend.
    
    Thus we have the multitude of whats known as COMMONALITY.
    we are a community that as it walks the streets of the net we are friendly and say hi as we pass. It is no less different than saying hi as you pass your neighbors and no less different then smiling and saying have a wonderful day.
    
    and under current Canadian law i am breaking no laws, there is a levy that is in place and i would argue that the current laws have no benefit to society and that the copyright laws were originally formed to give the artist SOME compensation NOT keep me from enjoying the art at there set of costs.
    
    It is narrow minded and short sited to see the economic loss hollywood has incurred upon us all and like the NHL hockey players , they should get a lot less for there doings and as one person said at slash dot , it is not art anymore it is nothing more then a business. That is why artistic movies and music rarely see the light and if they do its rare.
http://intensedebate.com/people/everybody everybody

To "freeload" means to survive off of somebody else's property. You are wrong on two counts: firstly, one cannot survive off of music or movies or things like that, and secondly, copyright is not a form of property, but rather a temporarily monopoly imposed as a means of providing some monetary incentive.
- fr33tard
  
  "To "freeload" means to survive off of somebody else's property."
  ————————————————
  
  uh, no it doesn't…
  
  please provide a link to this faulty description that mentions "property".
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze

Indeed, it's like they don't want people to share and be friends (or at least friendly) with each other.
Florida Bound

Would love to help, but Florida is where i reside. What they need is a street team.
- http://intensedebate.com/people/BenJones BenJones
  
  Talking to them (I've known the former US party chairman, now international coordinator for many years) If you want to see about starting a state party in other states, just contact them, and see about working on it together.
http://intensedebate.com/people/ess ess

It's definitely a step in the right direction. I think that even if they are more of an activist group than a political party, they will eventually be able to sway the laws being considered and enacted. However, it is also true that the bicameral party system is rather self-sustaining (though there is precedent of those parties changing), and it takes a lot for Americans as a populace to shift outside of their comfort zone. Things are changing every day, for better and worse, and if it gets bad enough, people will start fighting back.
- http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
  
  bicameral party system
  You have made an error. A party system cannot be bicameral. Only a legislature can be bicameral, which means that it consists of two bodies/chambers, which is what the U.S. Congress is: consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/ess ess
    
    Right, my mistake. I was trying to say two party system.
- http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
  
  The replacement of one of the two big parties with a third party is not unprecedented, but it has happened pretty much only twice in the history of the United States for over 200 years: the Democratic Party/Whig Party system replacing the Democratic Party/Federalist Party system, and then the Democratic Party/Republican Party system replacing the Democratic/Republican system. In the former of those two, the Whig Party was not a third party at all, but rather a splinter from the Democratic Party itself, leaving only one instance in history where a third party (the Republican Party) replaced an established party (the White Party). It is not likely that the Pirate Party will replace one of these two parties.
  
  Change, rather, has usually been enacted through history through pressuring changes in these political parties themselves. True, sometimes a third party sometimes helped, by threatening an established party with extinction if they didn't change, like when the Populist Party pressured the Democratic Party, but the fact still remains that pretty much all change was by non-governmental pressure forces than by the establishment of new political parties.
- http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
  
  The replacement of one of the two big parties with a third party is not unprecedented, but it has happened pretty much only twice in the history of the United States for over 200 years: the Democratic Party/Whig Party system replacing the Democratic Party/Federalist Party system, and then the Democratic Party/Republican Party system replacing the Democratic/Republican system. In the former of those two, the Whig Party was not a third party at all, but rather a splinter from the Democratic Party itself, leaving only one instance in history where a third party (the Republican Party) replaced an established party (the Whig Party). It is not likely that the Pirate Party will replace one of these two parties.
  
  Change, rather, has usually been enacted through history through pressuring changes in these political parties themselves. True, sometimes a third party sometimes helped, by threatening an established party with extinction if they didn't change, like when the Populist Party pressured the Democratic Party, but the fact still remains that pretty much all change was by non-governmental pressure forces than by the establishment of new political parties.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/ess ess
    
    Of course, and I never meant to deny that fact. America simply isn't a place where political parties change. It's the core values of said party. That is more what I'm hoping will happen with the Pirate Party. Even if all they do is spread the awareness of the need for change, it might be enough to eventually get the ball rolling.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      I never meant to deny that fact
      You never did deny the fact. I was just elucidating on some additional facts.
http://intensedebate.com/people/dxtr dxtr

Viva la Revolution, eh?! Well good sirs, I wish the very best of luck to them. But it's going to be very difficult, if I may say so, exceptionally difficult. But there is nothing that can stop piracy!! NOTHING!
http://stuckinframes.blogspot.com
- http://intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
  
  When the U.S. Pirate Party does not even have a Wikipedia page, whereas the U.S. Marijuana Party does have one, it is not a hopeful sign. I think that something else needs to be done.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/dxtr dxtr
    
    Well well well! Whaddaya know ?! I guess it's choosing better of two sins. Wait a minute, piracy isn't no sin. Especially against gigantic software and media corporations who have swallowed themselves and a lot of other people due to their insatiable greed. Marijuana on the other hand is evil! EVIL I TELL YOU!
    Go pirates, get a wikipedia page.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/dxtr dxtr
    
    Well well well! Whaddaya know ?! I guess it's choosing better of two sins. Wait a minute, piracy isn't no sin. Especially against gigantic software and media corporations who have swallowed themselves and a lot of other people due to their insatiable greed. Marijuana on the other hand is evil! EVIL I TELL YOU!
    Go pirates, get a wikipedia page.
    http://stuckinframes.blogspot.com
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
      
      Agreed, I do not like marijuana myself. Yet, it still stands that the U.S. Marijuana Party has a Wikipedia Page, and the U.S. Pirate Party has not.
      
      Political parties must be notable and in order to have a Wikipedia Page. I doubt that the U.S. Pirate Party is notable enough when it is not even registered in a single state. Yet, the U.S. Marijuana Party is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia Page.
      
      When the U.S. Pirate Party is not even as notable as the U.S. Marijuana Party, I think that it is a sign that something else should be done, like a non-governmental organization or something like that.
    - Jordan
      
      How long has the U.S Pirate Party been around? And how long has the Marijuana Party been around?
      
      Of course the latter has been around longer due to the fact that they got the media's attention.
      
      You gotta give it time before the U.S Pirate Party gets a page and even getting a page merely doesn't change anything.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      The U.S. Pirate Party has also gotten media attention. Just ask the person in charge of the U.S. Pirate Party: he can tell you the interviews and other news coverage so far.
      
      Will giving it time really do anything? After all, the libertarian party will continue to interfere, the plurality system will still disadvantage third parties in this two-party system, and most potential supporters will still not have strong feelings about it.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
      
      Although a Wikipedia page does not change anything, it does signify its significance: for something to have a Wikipedia page, it must at least be notable enough, and having a Wikipedia page signifies that it is at least notable.
      
      Also, contrast with the Swedish Pirate Party, which, only a few years after its formation, now has quite a significant following. May it be because of a different political system that does not favor a two party system? Or is it because people in Sweden are more passionate about this issue? I do not know which, but there is a difference. What works in Sweden might not be as effective in the United States.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/NubCakes NubCakes
      
      "for something to have a Wikipedia page, it must at least be notable enough."
      
      What are you rambling abut… you do realise that anybody can create and edit Wikipedia pages right. I could go and make a page about hte new pimple on my ass and you'd think that significant would you?
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
      
      Not just anything could have a Wikipedia page. Yes, anyone can create Wikipedia page, but for it to stay there rather than be deleted, it must be at least notable enough.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/magic_pants magic_pants
      
      Wikipedia has policies to get articles about unimportant things deleted. Here is the page on notability.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      The U.S. Pirate Party has also gotten media attention. Just ask the person in charge of the U.S. Pirate Party: he can tell you the interviews and other news coverage so far.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/BenJones BenJones
      
      There was a wikipedia page, it was later delated and folded into the single main page. The German pirate party (piratenpartei) doesn't have a page either, and they've run in several elections.
      Wikipedia is not the sum of all knowledge, just the sum of the knowledge of the people that have time to waste on it, is my opinion.
      
      BTW, over the last 3 years, we've exposed mediadefender's shady practices, initiated FCC hearings into comcast, given the only reliable coverage of the oink case, exposed buckcherry's publicity stunt, Encouraged Toyota to u-turn and fire a lawyer and many more and we've barely got more than a stub.
      
      Wikipedia is usefull for many things, but a measure of notability is it not.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
      
      What do you suggest is a more reliable measure of notability?
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/BenJones BenJones
      
      I don't know Shantih (aka Roze) but a website notoriously run badly isn't it. Perhaps news reports, or TV segments (like this one on the US G4 – formerly techTV – flagship show from 2007 http://g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/679293/…
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/BenJones BenJones
      I don't know Shantih (aka Roze) but a website notoriously run badly isn't it. Perhaps news reports, or TV segments (like this one on the US G4 – formerly techTV – flagship show from 2007
      http://intensedebate.com/people/NubCakes NubCakes
      
      Right, OK – after you've finished yelling like a 5 year old stop to think that pirated products run on computers and there are examples of mainstream computers not being hacked due to the technical difficulty involved. PS3 for example.
      
      http://intensedebate.com/people/dxtr dxtr
      
      umm, yes. Ever heard of a modchip. Yes, there are modchips for the PS3. Try to look harder before talking eh?!
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/The_Cheat The_Cheat
    
    If i could help them out i would but not living in the united states is a little setback… and unfortunately with the twat that is Steven Harper Canada does follow the US in most moves. (not to say any other PM would be much better) at least Bill-C61 has been delayed due to the vote being forced by the conservatives.
    
    http://renegadearmy.net
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/DaronK DaronK
    
    to people looking in from the outside.
    
    My Mother just lost her job at WAL-MART
    
    Why should I be worried about Net neutrialty? I want the economy fixed =(
    
    I think they will be recognized, and once that happens oh boy!!!!! They're gonna whoop some arse.
  - My Pen Is 404
    
    Maybe someone should charge the MPAA advertising fees for every person they share it with. lmao
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/GreenTeaa GreenTeaa
      
      Such as who?
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/ess ess
    
    There are many, many issues that need attention.I'm sorry for the situation your family is in, and I can most certainly sympathize considering my own financial setting. However, focusing on any one to the exclusion of all others is completely self-defeating. Maybe it's not important enough to most people, but it's certainly important to the MPAA, the RIAA, IFPI, etc. And if we simply let them push their own agenda without pushback, we'll walk away with a strong economy and an internet where civil liberties are nonexistent.
    
    That's why the masses are the ones who truly have the power. We have no need to focus all of everyone's attention on a single thing in order to build the foundation for each that will stabilize them.
    - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      One reason why the issue of copyright needs attention is that copyright policing clearly stifles culture and effectively imposes a police state on all communication that could possibly transmit copyrighted content, which is, of course, everything. It effectively puts the copyright holders (i. e. the industry) in control of the policing of all communication, public and private, for copyrighted content. While it is only "for copyrighted content," it pretty much affects everything, since copyrighted content is pretty much everywhere. It also pretty much subordinates all communication which could possibly transmit copyrighted content to the control of industry. People may not think that copyright affects them much, but it does, it certainly does.
      
      Copyright is not an issue of "downloading for free." It is an issue of control and power. Copyright is the perpetuation of the power and control of the copyright holders (i. e. the industry) over all of copyrighted content (which is everywhere) and any communication which could transmit it (which is pretty much everything), and the subordination of everyone to their power control regarding copyrighted content (which, again, is everywhere), and any communication which could transmit it (which, again, is pretty much anything).
      
      In fact, it is control of communication, the transmission of information. We have a word for this: censorship. Copyright, which is the effective policing of the transmission of information, is thus the policing of all communication, which is censorship by its very definition. Copyright is a freedom of speech issue.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      One reason why the issue of copyright needs attention is that copyright policing clearly stifles culture and effectively imposes a police state on all communication that could possibly transmit copyrighted content, which is, of course, everything. It effectively puts the copyright holders (i. e. the industry) in control of the policing of all communication, public and private, for copyrighted content. While it is only "for copyrighted content," it pretty much affects everything, since copyrighted content is pretty much everywhere. It also pretty much subordinates all communication which could possibly transmit copyrighted content to the control of industry. People may not think that copyright affects them much, but it does, it certainly does.
      
      Copyright is not an issue of "downloading for free." It is an issue of control and power. Copyright is the perpetuation of the power and control of the copyright holders (i. e. the industry) of all communication, and the subordination of everyone to their power control regarding copyrighted content, which, again, is everywhere, and any communication which could transmit it, which is also everywhere.
  - Pingback: El Partido Pirata aterriza en EE UU | Gadgets y Tecnología
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    Who are you to say what "yelling like a 5 year old" is? Also, what is your definition of "yelling like a 5 year old"? As far as I can tell, 5 year olds yell the say way as 30 year olds, only with a higher frequency of sound. Perhaps you are saying that dxtr's voice has high frequency, but you have no evidence of that. If you refer to childishness, then who are you to say that dxtr's comment was childish? How do you define "childish" in the first place? If you mean ignorant, you have no evidence that dxtr is ignorant. If you mean stupid, you have no evidence that dxtr is stupid, and besides, how do you define intelligence in the first place? What, are you much more intelligent, having an IQ of 160, and a membership at MENSA? Well, if so, IQ tests only measures the ability to take IQ tests, and membership at MENSA does not really mean that much anyways. If, by "childish," you mean conceited, then you have also not defined "conceited" as well. If, by "childish," you means something else, then you have neither explicitly stated it, nor have you provided evidence for it.
    
    Due to the grammatical errors in your comment, it was somewhat difficult to interpret your message (I surmise that commas should have been inserted after "old," "stop," and "computers"), but I have this to say in response: what does a PS3 and the fact that technical difficulty has hindered attempts to hack computer like the PS3 have anything to do with dxtr's comment that the U.S. Pirate Party's aim is difficult to achieve, but that piracy can never be stopped?
  - Pingback: nerdd.net | news and opinion
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Unidentified Unidentified
    
    and that makes you what, "retard" ?
  - blank
    
    im sigging up ;]
    
    btw the link to wiki is pointing to nl wiki
  - http://www.townsvillecomputerrepairs.com Jane
    
    Im in too
  - http://www.townsvillenerds.com John
    
    great stuff
  - http://www.rebootit.com.au mandy
    
    Im fat lol
  - http://xanga.com/AlaskanSweetheart Pix
    
    I did not make this image, but I felt it was need for this inparticular.
    
    [IMG]http://i44.tinypic.com/rua82u.jpg/IMG
  - Pix
    
    http://i44.tinypic.com/rua82u.jpg
  - http://musikmaniacs.blogspot.com MusikManiacs
    
    http://musikmaniacs.blogspot.com
  - Pingback: Free Culture News » Pirate Party attempting to become recognized party in California
  - Pingback: Lesezeichen vom 30-01-2009 | PolkaRobot
  - Lisa Woods
    
    Wow, I just love Pirate Parties!!
    
    http://www.internet-privacy.us.tc
  - http://www.doomsayer.org The Doomsayer
    
    You are using that image and you didn't create it eh? You're gonna get sued!
  - Thomas
    
    The United States of America is a constitutional representative republic; it is not a democracy.
    - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
      
      It is democratic, however, and therefore, the vote is supreme.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
    
    The only thing you have stated so far is not to fake multiple support. The definition of sockpuppet is as follows: an online identity used for purposes of deception within an Internet community. Since there is no deception intended, there is no sockpuppeting involved.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
    
    The only thing you have stated so far is not to fake multiple support. The definition of sockpuppet is as follows: an online identity used for purposes of deception within an Internet community. Since there is no deception intended, there is no sockpuppeting involved.
    
    The link that you have provided is broken.
  - fr33tard
    
    "I don't know Shantih (aka Roze)"
    
    "BTW, what have I told you about sockpuppeting?"
    ———————————————————————-
    
    LOL! poor roze just doesn't learn…
    
    "The only thing you have stated so far is not to fake multiple support."
    ———————————————————————-
    
    please. upping your own posts using multiple accounts is most definitely "faking support".
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Shantih Shantih
    
    upping your own posts using multiple accounts is most definitely "faking support"
    Why should I take this reputation point system seriously? It is only something that I waste time on when I am bored. I meant actual substantial support: support in the substance of the comments themselves, which is what matters more. It makes no difference what name it is, after all, for what is in a mere username? However, if BenJones asks for the cessation of all activities with alternate IntenseDebate Accounts on TorrentFreak, then I can do so. I guess it is my lone opinion that I do not like IntenseDebate.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    only someone truly deluded
    When you are poisoning the well with a preemptive like that, it makes the rest of your comment dubious.
    
    Also, there is a difference, but it is not in whether it is right or wrong.
  - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    Even if this particular definition is incorrect, it is still dubious that it is any "freeloading" due to the fact that one cannot survive off of music or movies &c., in addition to the fact that any actual benefits are dubious, since music/movies are just music/movies. Moreover, you are making a false ascription of the quality that file-sharers do not at least try to pay, whereas, for example, many would want to make a donation to the original creator – indicating that file-sharers do not freeload.
    - fr33tard
      
      "it is still dubious that it is any "freeloading" due to the fact that one cannot survive off of music or movies"
      ————————————————
      
      that is an irrelevant fact in regard to the definition of 'freeloading" which you still don't seem to understand.
      
      and pirates "trying to pay" doesn't put food on anyone's table or a roof over anyone's head.
      
      furthermore if the radiohead/NIN experiments taught us anything, it's that the VAST MAJORITY of pirates have no interest in paying even a single CENT directly to the artist in exchange for their hard work.
      
      and personally, i don't like being forced into a position dependant on charity, especially given how cheap the majority of your freeloaders have proven yourselves to be.
  - CHRoNoSS
    
    lets say they get some traction
    ya want to know why its a mixed bag
    if it takes votes mostly from the democratic party guess who gets power and may secretly wish this to be the case, we have seen that Ralph Nader may have in fact cost Al Gore a presidency and if you add a pirate party that gets a 1% or 2 or 5 then you got the George bush party in ……
    What they should do that's WAY more effective is not JUST form that party but also form a lobby group that can offset the MPAA bribe er donate to politicians to show them you can have good or better gov't without having to take form the numb nut mpaa
  - CHRoNoSS
    
    and don't ya love how Americans then come back and say were not a democracy…..a republic is a form of democracy, if you want more democracy strive for it. the system you have you think works best use it, if that is a republic then fine. all systems have flaws and as such value them all as they are at least trying to give voice to a common man in a crowd.
  - Jake J
    
    I'm moving to California this week. I'll add my signature.
  - http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
    
    that is an irrelevant fact in regard to the definition of 'freeloading" which you still don't seem to understand.
    It is not irrelevant because you have used the word "freeloading," and it is part of the definition of the word "freeloading." You do not have to be so anti-dictionary.
    
    Also, paying does indeed put food on the table, or a roof on somebody's head. Copyright does not even make people pay, who would not have paid int he first place. There is no evidence whatsoever that people pay due to copyright. Even if copyright does make people pay (which, of course, is false), the fact is that it is much better to make money off of complimentary works instead. There is little money to be made through non-commercial usages, so there is much more money from commercial usages, like screening in movies, or live performances, or things like that.
    
    The radiohead/NIN experiments have taught us the opposite of what you have stated. You do not have to be so anti-reality.
    
    Even if donations are required, the fact is that this charity is no different from buying. If people did not want to support the creators of a piece of work, then they choose not to buy it. To buy it is essentially to give charity. If you want to live off of selling "art," then you are living off of charity no matter what.
    - fr33tard
      
      “It is not irrelevant because you have used the word "freeloading," and it is part of the definition of the word "freeloading." You do not have to be so anti-dictionary.”
      ————————–
      
      LOL!
      
      the word “survivability” has nothing to do with the definition of “freeloading”. you are a f*cking idiot. saying i am “anti-dictionary” is just the icing on your failcake. please link me to the definition that mentions “survivability”. i dare you to try.
      
      “the fact is that it is much better to make money off of complimentary works instead.”
      ————————–
      
      LOL!
      
      a funny thing with your posts is that whenever you say “the fact is…” (which is annoyingly often i’m afraid) what invariably follows is the furthest thing from a fact as you could possibly get. you are confusing “opinions” and “facts” which makes you an idiot.
      
      “There is little money to be made through non-commercial usages”
      ————————–
      
      LOL!
      
      wow. just. wow. this might be the single dumbest thing you’ve ever posted here, and that is quite a feat…
      
      "so there is much more money from commercial usages, like screening in movies, or live performances, or things like that."
      —————————
      
      LOL!
      
      1) box office is the smallest revenue source for the film industry (which makes you an idiot)
      
      2) live performances are expected to eclipse recorded music sales this year for the first time ever and this is largely attributed to the increase in online piracy. (hardly what I’d call “much more money” especially considering it hasn’t even happened yet…which makes you an idiot)
      
      3) the video game industry took in 32 billion last year selling games. You apparently think the majority of that was made through commercial halo tournaments (which makes you an idiot).
      
      "The radiohead/NIN experiments have taught us the opposite of what you have stated. You do not have to be so anti-reality."
      —————————-
      
      LOL!
      
      you are the last person that should be calling anyone “anti-reality”. Someone high out of their mind on LSD has a better grip on reality than you do. the fact is (see what I did there?) only 38% of the people who downloaded “in rainbows” paid anything. and that’s for a rather cultish band that had 13 years of previous big label backing and marketing through capitol records!
      
      “Even if donations are required, the fact is that this charity is no different from buying…To buy it is essentially to give charity…If you want to live off of selling "art," then you are living off of charity no matter what.”
      —————————-
      
      LOL!
      
      there is a HUGE difference between having to rightfully pay for what you consume and choosing to pay for what you consume. “selling” is not the same as “charity”.
      
      why don't you take your own advice and crack open a dictionary?
      
      “Even if donations are required, the fact is that this charity is no different from buying…To buy it is essentially to give charity…If you want to live off of selling "art," then you are living off of charity no matter what.”
      —————————-
      - http://intensedebate.com/people/Roze Roze
        
        "Little money to be made through non-commercial usages" refers to the comparative amount to be made through commercial usages. One academic named Hilden has already proposed this scheme of profiting through commercial usage instead.
        
        "the fact is (see what I did there?) only 38% of the people who downloaded “in rainbows” paid anything. and that’s for a rather cultish band that had 13 years of previous big label backing and marketing through capitol records!"
        In actuality, according to a Gallup poll, to the vast majority of people (above 80%), sharing makes no difference in their likeliness to buy a work. Those other 62% percent would not have bought anyways if it were not available for free.
        
        there is a HUGE difference between having to rightfully pay for what you consume and choosing to pay for what you consume. “selling” is not the same as “charity”.
        In actuality, nobody "has to" pay for any music/movies/&c. because people do indeed choose to pay for what they consume. For example, nobody "has to" watch a certain movie; people choose to see the movie. For people to see the movie in the first place for a certain price is indeed charity, because nobody really needs to see the movie.
        
        1) box office is the smallest revenue source for the film industry (which makes you an idiot)
        
        2) live performances are expected to eclipse recorded music sales this year for the first time ever and this is largely attributed to the increase in online piracy. (hardly what I’d call “much more money” especially considering it hasn’t even happened yet…which makes you an idiot)
        
        3) the video game industry took in 32 billion last year selling games. You apparently think the majority of that was made through commercial halo tournaments (which makes you an idiot).
        In addition to the fact that the Gallup poll mentioned above has shown that it makes no difference to whether people buy it or not, you have no citations that any of these three points are false, or, even if they are false for the time being, you have not proven that it is in fact, impossible for them to be true in the future.
  - HAHAHAH
    
    Why even discuss this foul smelling FARCE called the US PIRATE PARTY? Flush it before it stinks up the room and move on to a serious political organization and not some pimply faced jokes.
  - Pingback: El Partido Pirata aterriza en EE UU
  - Pingback: Stocks and Bonds » Blog Archive » Laptop Brigade: Ron Paul on Monetary Reform | Free Laptop and …
  - travis
    
    sorry roze but you were almost entirely inaccurate in the majority of the facts you just claimed….while i think we’d actually agree these subjects your facts just aren’t quote there

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

US Pirate Party Docks in California

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

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

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

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

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

The Pirate Bay Moves to .SX as Prosecutor Files Motion to Seize Domains

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed