Copyright is an involved, complicated topic and its reform is a cornerstone of the Pirate Party of New Zealand.
Copyright is a legal abstract that is utilised by many segments of our society for a variety of reasons; from protecting and even maximising profits to protecting and maximising creative freedom.
Poll Created Sun 9 Feb 2014 7:32PM
Should the party oppose all copyright restrictions? Closed Fri 14 Feb 2014 8:08AM
Abolishing copyright is an untenable position at the moment.
There's a lot they party can do to restore the balance of copyright in favour of individual creativity and shift society's attitude one step at a time.
|Results||Option||% of points||Voters|
|Disagree||90.0%||9||DU TF CM BK RU|
|Undecided||0%||10||KT PA DU|
10 of 20 people have voted (50%)
Sun 9 Feb 2014 7:56PM
Yawn here we go in circles again.
We should not lightly overturn existing policy previously decided by the membership.
Sun 9 Feb 2014 10:57PM
The abolition of copyright would also abolish copyleft, turning all software into BSD/MIT, and abolish the enforceability of CC licenses. I would support abolishing all use of the criminal justice system to enforce copyright though.
Mon 10 Feb 2014 10:39PM
Copyright in it's earlier form as a limited monopoly on publishing and performance is still a valid way to encourage the creation of some kinds of works and can coexist without infringing on personal freedoms to any significant extent.
Tue 11 Feb 2014 6:45PM
The international Pirate concensus is reform - not abolition
Thu 13 Feb 2014 2:24AM
Copyright should be reduced in term initially towards elimination, but copyleft should remain in force.
Ideally we do not want to rehash old decisions of core policy for the sake of it.
Copyright is aimed towards 5 year profitability anyway.
Thu 13 Feb 2014 9:54AM
Abolition of copyright is a bad idea.
Copyright should be reduced to a sane length, from its currently insane length.
What that length should be is up for debate but I feel somewhere between 10 - 25yrs if a fair compromise.
Fri 14 Feb 2014 6:11AM
Copyright is an artificial construct. One that can be used to foster true creativity and commercial success, or crush it and act anti-competitively. It has a place in our society, we should aim to restore balance.
Hubat McJuhes Sun 9 Feb 2014 8:55PM
@tommyfergusson I agree with Craig.
Recent discussions on the mailing list have shown that there is a lot of uncertainty about what the current status of our policies in regard of copyright and patent law is. More differentiated positions have been presented as well.
If we believe that loomeo is a better tool to develop better decisions than mailing lists and forums are. This could be a good candidate to show that.
It can also teach us how far we can get without preferential voting in the toolbox.
And then there is that argument, that has been used a couple of times in the near past, that the desire to discuss matters among members will result in discussing those matters and one shouldn't try to slow that down. If this argument applies to what some regard as non-core policies, it sure applies to classic core issues, doesn't it?
Danyl Strype Sun 9 Feb 2014 10:52PM
As I said in the drug policy thread, we need to clearly distinguish between policy - what we agree internally should be the end goal - and strategy - what we think we can get broader agreement on from other parties to actually pass a Bill moving us towards that end goal.
So, do @tommyfergusson and others oppose the abolition of copyright on principle - it's not your end goal - or are you saying that you agree that it is the end goal, but you don't think it's politically realistic in the short term?
Tommy Fergusson Sun 9 Feb 2014 11:32PM
They may be perpetually changed and revised, but they will only go round and around in circles if people try to ignore or make disappear the discussions and decisions that have already happened.
@hubatmcjuhes for sure, Loomio is a better tool and that is why we have adopted it (or at least will be once the membership has had a fair chance to know about & join it). However, a better candidate to show this advantage would be any of the topics that the forums couldn't handle. Re-hashing one that even the forums achieved a conclusion on proves nothing.
perhaps the most relevant, http://pirateparty.org.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1159
Where a pre-existing policy is being overturned (even one from 2 1/2 years ago like this one), I suggest summarizing the old discussion and conclusion, and then you can build on that without reinventing the circle - explain why the conclusion is so unacceptable and your suggested option. Any new decision resulting from that more transparent process has not been made lightly, and should stand.
If this topic had been brought up by someone who wasn't active on the forums back then and didn't know he was overturning existing policy, this would all just be a note. But you do know about the old policy votes.
Danyl Strype Mon 10 Feb 2014 12:23AM
BTW @craigmagee can you please change the title of this discussion thread to 'Copyright'? Presumably we will use it over time to flesh out a full copyright policy and positions on any current issues which involve copyright, not just to discuss the current proposal.
Bruce Kingsbury Mon 10 Feb 2014 10:42PM
Abolishing copyright entirely is a 'viable' position (Hey, isn't that my words above?) but I don't really think it's the 'best' position.
Hubat McJuhes Tue 11 Feb 2014 8:24AM
We have to analyse the problem and then try to find a solution from there. While the current ridiculously long copyright periods are problematic indeed, I don't think that copyrights as such are the essence of the problem.
I have the vague feeling that that essence might be in the selling of the copyright from creatives to big players which then in turn don't maintain a proper relationship between creatives and consumers.
I think that creatives strive for a different kind of relationship to their audience while also want to be able to live from what they are doing; which is different from the point of view than the purely profit oriented rights owners establish.
There lies the problem. The greedy middle tier must go away.
Simply removing copyright completely will not do the job. I wonder if it would help if the copyright, as a right of the creator, could not be taken from him and therefore also not be sold. It would be a life long right that amongst other things could entitle the bearer to sell limited licenses of their work.
Just a thought.
[deactivated account] Tue 11 Feb 2014 10:52AM
Ideally we want something like the situation for maths, it is not property, yet the inventor of a formula gets credit and recognition for their work, with the possibility of winning a prize, working in industry, or earning a living from academia.
Danyl Strype Tue 11 Feb 2014 10:48PM
The difference is that maths consists of discoveries not creations. If I write a novel, I'm not just discovering something that someone else would have eventually discovered. I'm creating something that it a unique expression of my POV on the world.
I agree with @hubatmcjuhes that the ability to alienate copyright is part of the problem. All aspects of copyright could be like "moral rights" which remain with the creator no matter what. The only problem with that is what happens when a creation is massive collaboration between large teams of creators, such as a feature length movie, or a free code software project?
Bruce Kingsbury Thu 13 Feb 2014 10:10AM
I am completely against having different lengths for 'copyleft' vs. all-rights-reserved. I don't think it would be possible to implement in simple and well defined laws, and I don't think it's necessary. A large part of the problem with modern copyright is that it's already too complex for most normal people (and even many politicians) to understand.
Craig Magee Fri 14 Feb 2014 7:40PM
Comment if there's a problem with the description or outcome text. I tried not to make it opinionated, but seem to have with the outcome anyway.
Craig Magee · Sun 9 Feb 2014 8:22PM
Issues will perpetually go round and around, unless a previous position isn't allowed to be revisited.