Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

Copyright Regime vs Civil Liberties

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
So, my name is Karl Fogel and I am editor of questioncopyright.org and I just want to give a very brief introduction. I wont get too much in between you and Rick just to explain what he is doing here. When we first called Rick and asked him if he would like to come to America and give some talks on what the Pirate Party is about and what its doing we expected to have to twist his arm a little bit. But to our very pleasant surprise he agreed immediately to come and I wondered why, because I mean he is running for election in Europe and how many Swedish voters really are there in the bay area? I dont know it may be one right there :) Its not exactly your first choice for getting elected in Sweden. But the reason he came is that the partys mission is worldwide reform of copyright and patent policy and the Party fully understands the, shall we say concetrating effect that electro victory in Sweden would have on parlaments throughout Europe and even in the US. That would be very big effect, which brings me to my next point. Political donations in Sweden are not regulated and anonymity is the default for donations to the Pirate Party. When Rick and I were up at OSCON, the O'Reilly Open Source Convention in Portland last week. He gave a keynote, essentialy a very compressed version of this talk with lot of the details left out. People literaly came up to the stage and pressed money into his hands after that keynote. I saw it happened. If you were not able to be at OSCON, but you would like to do that too, you should feel free to do it today. Rick will be giving you some more details and URL about how you can donate if you dont feel like pressing cash into his bare palms today. The Pirate Party is a very good cause, they are tremendously effective and if they manage to get into parliament in Sweden, into the European parliament, it will do a lot to help copyright reform in the Europe and the US. Thank you and without further due, Rick Falkvinge of the Swedish Pirate Party. Thanks Karl. So, my talk today is titled Copyright Regime vs. Civil Liberties. It might as well have been titled Copyright Industry vs. The Future. How many of you guys in here have heard about the Pirate Party in Sweden before today? Show hands. About 2/3, I am happy. How many of you were at OSCON and heard my talk there? Two. Ok, so you are gonna see a little bit like u saw at OSCON, but most of it is new. So, a little bit about who I am and why I am wearing clothes saying Pirate. That may sound a little bit silly. In January of 2006, I set up a webpage for prototype new political party, called the Pirate Party advocating copyright and patent reform. It basicaly blew up in my face, very, very quickly become a real party registered with the election authority, went on the ballet. In June of last year, we had a breakthrough to media mainstream awareness and in September, we had our first election. We got a popular voting of 0.63% I hoped for more, but it turns out that that put us in the top 10 results. Which even was a record for a party founded on election year. We are particulary strong among the young voters, which can be seen in our Youth Section, which is now ranked #4 nationaly. They have had a 30% growth in just the past 6 moths. So, we are seeing a lot of interest in these issues, we are seeing a lot of uptake. We are very much influencing the debate whenever here is something about file sharing. It takes about 5 minutes from, for example a verdict and important court case until media caught us. So, what is this about then? Why do you found a Pirate Party? What is the file sharing debate about? The copyright industry likes to talk about economic principles as in: "File sharing hurts our profits !!!" And then somebody counters and says: "No it doesn't" Yes it does ! No it doesn't ! Yes it does !!! No it doesn't !!! And it becomes sort of trench warfare discussion where its a lot of 'he says', 'she says', 'he says', 'she says' and when you have just a lot of conflicting reports with opposite conclussions you kind of lose the audience, the whole thing becomes pretty boring. So what we are saying is that copyright at its heart is a commercial monopoly. When it was created, it was created to distribute books to bookstores by horse and cart and the key thing there is that if you ??? the fraction of copyright you could find a copied book in bookstore you could see an unauthorized concert not paying license money and the key here is that you found those in public places with the naked eye. Today however copyright has creped into my private communications. It is illegal for me to send a piece of music in e-mail to you guys. It is illegal if we are in a chat channel to drop a videoclip there. And if copyright is to be enforced in this new environment than that means all private communications must be monitored for copyright infractions. That means outcast of postal secret. That means law enforcement and corporate interest groups must monitor every 1 and 0 that leaves my computer and that includes looking at letters to my lawyer and doctor and wife. I am frankly not prepared to give them that right. And it gets worse. The copyright industry is now lobbing for ISPs to be liable for what their users do on the NET. And there goes another very important principle called the common carrier principle which says that the messenger is never responsible for the contents of the message. Imagine if the US postal service would be liable for what you send in the letters. This is what the copyright industry is lobbing for and they are taking advantage of the fact that politicians are clueless about what new technology means. So, our poor lady justice has a problem. On one side of the scale you have one income source for one entertainment industry. Essentialy a luxury consumption in our society. On the other side of the scale you have two foundations of our democracy. So its actually gets even worse. If you abandon the postal secret and the law of corporate interest groups of for ??? law enforcement to examine private communications Out goes whistleblower protection. No matter what those people investigating the communications can or cannot do with it. If you uncover scandal and mail a report about it somebody will have read that mail on route. And if it is juicy enough there is just no way that person can forget what he/she read It has been read and cannot be unread and the whistleblower protection is gone. And by extension freedom of the press becomes something basically just a piece of paper. Because if you can't have any sources inside government telling you about things that don't work or officials that are misbehaving or trust that is being broken what are you going wrong about These weeks horoscope. It gets even worse actually. If you know you are being monitored you tend a put a little bit of selfish restrain on yourself. You tend to not say the things that you typically would have said when you know that you are not monitored. And this actually gets very important because particularly for some people. I was at the gay pride parade in Stockholm and I was sort of toying around with this for me perfectly logical, rational argument that If you don't have access to private communications as an unmonitored private communications then you lose your right to form an identity because your identity is formed in a very private exchange between you and friends. And when I through this argument at the pride park which is just next to the parade and discus with people there. I could see it hit them very hard and emotionally. What had been just rational for me become an extremely emotional moment for these people when the penny dropped. You could see them just relive what they have been through as part of discovering their identity. An unofficial ??? among this crowd BTW, we got 20%. There was one source of culture and knowledge and that single source was the church. The communication was top to bottom, you had one source that communicated out to the masses and this is kind of important because if you can control somebody's culture and knowledge you don't need to lobby for a single law. You control the world. Time passed, printing press arrived late 1400 spread across Europe. Always sudden you had multiple sources of information And people could start pick and choose

Video Details

Duration: 54 minutes and 56 seconds
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: Google engEDU
Views: 143
Posted by: radixxko on Jun 10, 2009

Google Tech Talks July 31, 2007 ABSTRACT Rick Falkvinge, the founder of the Swedish Pirate Party and the international politicized pirate movement, talks about the rise and success of pirates, and why pirates are necessary in today's politics. He'll also outline the next steps in the pirates' strategy to change global copyright laws. The fight against copyright aggression tends to focus on economic aspects of the shift to a networked economy. Rick explains how this conflict is much more important than that: the fight against the copyright regime is about the right to fundamental civil liberties - down to the postal secret, whistleblower protection, freedom of the press, and the very right to an identity.

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub above to caption this video.