ZeroPaid.com » pirate party

Editorial: Digesting the Canadian Election Results and Subsequent Possible Online Policy

Drew Wilson — Wed, 04 May 2011 04:28:58 +0000

Most Canadians and many around the world are waking up to the reality of what happened during the election - that is a Conservative majority government. The question remains, how will digital policies shape up now?

Let's point out something very obvious: Bill C-60 during the Liberal government, Bill C-61 of the later Conservative government, and Bill C-32 of the previous Conservative government. What are a few things these bills had in common? They all dealt with copyright. They all had American style copyright reforms in them (earlier ones more than the later ones), and they all died on the order paper because each government was under a minority government situation and they dies on the order paper as a result. Now, what makes this government different than the others in the past? It's a majority government meaning that Canadians won't have their say on issues until 2015 because there are more Conservatives then there are all other political parties combined. This means that the one thing protecting Canadians from bad copyright policy is gone and that has a lot of people very nervous for the future of Canada in an online world. Michael Geist has weighed in on this saying that there are pitfalls and opportunities on the horizon because of privacy reform and the more progressive copyright law seen in the previous session. Russell McOrmond watched the election and offered up some advice including this: "Don’t blindly follow the protectionist demands of the US democrats". While others have yet to weigh in, there's that sense that somehow, politicians within the Conservatives can be swayed to table sound policy - especially on issues like copyright. I can't say I'm that optimistic because the Conservatives have primarily been a "my way or the highway" type of party to begin with. Since they have the majority of the seats, they hold all the keys, and thus, they are accountable to no one. They don't have to listen to Canadians any more at this stage for the next four years. I really almost don't want to run through what is up at the cutting block because it sickens me just thinking what can happen in the next four years, but it is, nevertheless, the informative thing to do to begin with. Removal of Funding from Opposition Parties When the Canadian Pirate Party managed to joined the political process in Canada, it was seen as a major victory for those who focus on online issues because if any party understood issues like copyright and privacy online, it would be the Pirate Party of Canada. Now, the Conservatives have vowed to end public subsidies to political parties. Normally, parties receive 2 dollars for every vote. With the Conservatives vowing to end that, it will mean smaller parties will be substantially harmed including, very likely, the Pirate Party. What this will do is essentially Americanize the political system in Canada so that only parties that have the backing of large corporations can be heard. That could mean that, in the future, online rights will have a very hard time trying to survive a corporate sponsored political system because political parties then have to go to multi-million dollar companies to get funding or risk being drowned out on the airwaves and the teams of publicisits online. Conservatives have vowed to gut this policy, so it's very unlikely it'll be around by 2013. Privacy Online on Life Support? The Conservatives did suggest that they will create an omnibus anti-crime bill soon after coming in to political power. Bundled in that will very likely be the surveillance legislation that online advocates have been fighting against for years. In past iterations, this legislation has been about gathering information on unsuspecting people online without a warrant. Realistically speaking, if it gets any worse now than before, it'll essentially be the same thing as the warrantless wiretapping going on in the US. Since Conservatives are famous for their jet's n' jails policy as far as opposition parties are concerned, this is just about a guarantee that we'll have that. So, maybe researching VPN services would be the next best option for Canadians at this point and the moment such legislation is tabled, take up such services because the government will very likely be watching your communications whether for legitimate or illegitimate reasons. The Canadian DMCA This should be just about self-evident to most copyright watchers. Bill C-61 was pretty much the Canadian DMCA at its worst under the Conservative governments of the past. They tried a more moderate approach to appease voters with Bill C-32 in the last session, but with the pressure of being accountable off of their shoulder, chances are, the Conservatives will simply revert to the worse of the two laws. We certainly know from Wikileaks that when Conservatives are in power, American corporations write our laws - especially on copyright issues. What are corporations pushing throughout the world right now? Just ask New Zealand where Wikileaks revealed, much to the dismay of some political parties there, how Hollywood dictated to New Zealand that they are going to have a three strikes law. So, at this stage, I personally think that it's a very real possibility that Canadians will be fighting a three strikes law in the future. There are also a few other options plausibly on the table on copyright. In the US, there was the push to pass something called the "INDUCE" act that outlawed "inducing someone to infringe. Some critics felt that any piece of technology that could theoretically be used to infringe could also be inducement. One offshoot possibility that I can say is too early to tell is whether or not copyright could be so strict, that even discussing infringement could be a crime. That possibility isn't as likely as a copy of the INDUCE act, but I can say that this would be a worst case scenario. There is also the matter of international agreements. With ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) and TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement), there's really no barriers now to stopping some of the worst kinds of international pressure to change the criminal code at this stage should they both be finalized in the next four years. TPP in particular would worse ISPs to become copyright cops and create the much reviled three strikes law in case the Conservatives don't create one on their own. Conclusion Yes, this is entirely speculation and yes, there needs to be a continual reminder that Canadians want better lawmaking in these areas, but I can't say I would be surprised if Canadians are ignored on these important issues. I should know being in a Conservative stronghold myself. I know how much (lack) of representation a constituent gets first-hand if they live in a Conservative riding. When Harper runs the Canadian Charter through a Conservative branded shredder made in China, he'll do it with a smile and assurance that it's for our own good. Don't like this outlook? Prove me wrong. I seriously hope, above all else, that I am completely wrong on this and the Canadian government doesn't choose to enact half of this, but I personally wouldn't count on a positive outlook in the future. Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

Pirate Party Candidate to Run for Office in Florida

Drew Wilson — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:20:38 +0000

America is often seen as a land of the two party system, but other parties to exist in the US. The Florida Pirate Party is currently in the process of being able to run candidates in the Sunshine state.

You've got to admit, it certainly takes courage to be a candidate for a political party hoping to get a seat anywhere - especially when you belong to neither the Democrat or Republican parties. Still, that is exactly what the Florida Pirate Party is currently doing. According to the Florida Pirate Party website, Ryan Moffitt, Chairman of the Pirate Party of Florida has begun his campaign to become the Florida state House Representative from District 86. "Once the paperwork has been certified by the Division of Elections," Moffitt said, "I will be cleared to gather donations, and begin gathering voter petitions to get a spot on the ballot in the 2012 general election." "We have a long road ahead of us on this one. I need 518 Florida voter’s signatures to get on the ballot. I simply can’t do this alone. Facing an incumbent representative of the two party system is no easy task, but with a grass-roots base, and sheer strength of will, I genuinely believe we can make a stand." There is certainly a lot of issues that can be raised in the US. Copyright laws such as the DMCA and warrantless wiretapping are two issues that would suit the Pirate Party well even though such policies are from a different branch of government. But one needs to start somewhere. Moffitt added, "Let this be the beginning of the end of the monopolist copyright industry. Let this be the beginning of the end of back room deals and secret operations. Let this be the beginning of the end of warrantless wiretapping and censorship." "With your help, we can bring the state of Florida into the new digital age, in a free and open manner run by the people, and for the people. We can end the old ideals, and the old guard who believe communication and creation should stay in the domain of ivory towers, marble halls or glass office buildings. The future belongs to us, the people." I'm sure he's got a lot of work ahead of him at this stage. Breaking a two party system would certainly be no easy task. Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

Pirate Party to Offer VPN to Protect Canadians from Conservative Majority

Drew Wilson — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:33:48 +0000

It's a service often used for dissidents in repressive regimes, but if a Conservative majority were to happen in the Canadian elections, the Pirate Party of Canada says they'll be there to help. A VPN service can help annonymize internet activity and for those fearful of a Conservative majority, it might very well be at least a bit of comforting news.

Conservative majority. If you are Canadian, you've more than likely heard this concept in the past few weeks. Some say that it'll be a dark day in Canada should the Conservatives win a majority, Is this such a frightening concept? To some, it is. In fact, for some, it's so frightening, it warrants an anonymous online solution should the Conservatives win a majority of seats in parliament. The pirate party explains the possible situation:

If given a majority government, the Conservatives are promising to ram through a bill that would provide unprecedented systematic interception and monitoring of Canadians’ personal communications. In short, Canada will soon join the growing list of countries subject to invasion of privacy and internet censorship. Therefore, the Pirate Party is preparing to extend the services presently offered to residents of repressive regimes to protect the people affected by the aspiring dictator right here at home.

The fact that some are preparing for the worse like this certainly does provide some reason to be concerned. Could a Conservative majority bring forth a repressive era in Canada so strict, that services often reserved for third world dictatorships may now need to be deployed in Canada? One things for sure, a Conservative majority is uncharted territory for this generation. “We will provide VPN service to Canadians at a rate of $10 / 200GB. For every paid account we open, we will also provide a free VPN account to a citizen of a nation with censored internet,” said party leader Mikkel Paulson today. “This allows us to simultaneously provide protection to Canadians and expand our humanitarian support abroad. We won’t keep logs of the activity, although we will of course cooperate with law enforcement in the event of abuse of our services.” The Pirate Party said that those interested in the service can e-mail them at vpn@pirateparty.ca. Whether or not it ever gets to that point remains to be seen, but if it well and truly does get to this point, it's nice to know that the Pirate Party of Canada is working to assist Canadians concerned about their communications under such a political event. Further reading: Pirate Party Press Release Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

Canada’s Election: A Review of the Pirate Party Platform on Digital Issues

Drew Wilson — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:04:21 +0000

We are reviewing party platforms for this years Canadian election. We've done all of the major political parties at this point in time, but it really seems necessary to fall back on the Pirate Party over these digital issues given the poor performance of all of the parties we have reviewed so far.

We have finished reviewing the platforms for the Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc Québécois, NDP and the Green Party on the issues of privacy on the internet and copyright. I can admit at this point that it's getting very depressing reviewing these, so I have chosen to review the Pirate Party. The platform of the Pirate Party can be found on their official website. It isn't a PDF and is more HTML based. The Pirate Party Platform For the first time, the issue of copyright is the very first issue that is brought up in the platform:

1. Copyright Law * Reinforce and protect fair dealing. * Decriminalize non-commercial file sharing, and prohibit statutory damages for non-commercial sharing. * Allow content creators to explicitly dedicate material to the public domain. * Reform crown copyright to ensure open access to Canadians.

From an artists perspective, the first point hits my concerns very nicely. I've always felt that a broad and more open fair dealing regime really strengthened and stimulated creativity. The second point is excellent from a consumers perspective because I don't think it really makes sense to treat non-commercial infringement the same as commercial infringement. Sometimes, lawmakers and lobbyists don't want that distinction so they can have, in a way, a lottery in reverse where multi-national corporations pick a random target and bleed as much money out of them as possible through a heavily flawed copyright regime to help salvage their business model that has long since been obsolete. It never seemed right and the more most people look in to such activity, the more others tend to agree. The third point is interesting because I thought that creators could submit content to the public domain through Creative Commons. No rights reserved is, to my knowledge, public domain. I admit that I'm less familiar with the last point, but I do know that it doesn't make sense that the government can copyright work when it's paid for by the public to begin with. So, that's an interesting point. Further down, we have the following:

3. Privacy * Enforce the same privacy laws on electronic communication as the traditional postal service. * Strengthen the powers of Privacy Commissioner. * Fight bills and regulation that violate your right to personal privacy.

I really like the perspective on the first point. If one were to send something online with the intention that only the receiving end will read it, why not treat it like the postal service? Yes, one can post something publicly, but should an individual elect to make the communication private, why deny that person the choice of making something private? The second point is quite nice because the privacy commissioner has been known to do some excellent work over the years. I think good work should be rewarded and/or encouraged in government. The last point pretty much reinforces the first point, but I think it's worth repeating that any bill that targets personal privacy should be treated with scepticism. Are checks and balances in place? If not, why are we even considering any privacy busting legislation? It seemed like we got what we came for, but there is one note worth posting about and that's the last point on the platform:

7. Protecting Canadians’ Charter Rights * The Pirate Party will stand up against violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, particularly infringement of freedom of expression and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.

This pretty much cements what has been said above. Mentioning our rights really does put a smile on my face since it seems that our rights are constantly being eroded by domestic policy making - particularly in the areas we are targeting with these reviews. So, top marks all around. Overall Impression I've spoken from time to time with members of the Pirate Party of Canada in the past online and the overall positions I've heard discussed are pretty much mentioned in the platform itself. The party wants to protect sound copyright lawmaking and they even care about online privacy. When the bar seems to be set so low by other parties, it seems pretty easy to go clear over the bar and set a higher standard for online issues. So, thumbs up for that. I would go so far as to say if all issues of privacy were removed from the platform, the platform would still get a thumbs up from me. If the election were decided on these issues, it's very easy for me to vote Pirate Party. Good platform on these issues and even if they didn't have much of a track record per-se, I'd say the platform pretty much sells itself on these issues. Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

Swedish Pirate Party Agrees to Host WikiLeaks Servers

Jared Moya — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 00:57:58 +0000

Moves to shield whistleblower site from pressure over its decision to release some 76,000 classified US documents concerning the war in Afghanistan, as well as strengthen its ability to disclose controversial material in the future.

The Swedish Pirate Party continues to make waves with news that it signed an agreement to begin hosting whistleblower site WikiLeaks servers. "The contribution of WikiLeaks is tremendously important to the entire world," says Rick Falkvinge, leader of the Pirate Party, in a statement. "We desire to contribute to any effort that increases transparency and accountability of power in the world." The Pirate Party will begin providing free bandwidth to the site much as it has already done for Swedish BitTorrent tracker site The Pirate Bay. "This is one of our signatures," adds Falkvinge. "We don’t just talk. We act. Using our own resources and time, we help change the world rather than pass the buck, commission reports, and avoid responsibility like other politicians." WikiLeaks has been at the center of a media firestorm over the past few weeks for its decision to release some 76,000 classified US documents concerning the war in Afghanistan. "We welcome the help provided by the Pirate Party," says Julian Assange, spokesperson for WikiLeaks. "Our organisations share many values and I am looking forward to future ways we can help each other improve the world." It claims to have another 15,000, "more sensitive," documents to release in the coming weeks once it has a chance to vet them and remove names of Afghans assisting coalition troops, something it failed to do the first time around and for which it was rightly criticized by a number of leading human rights organizations. The Pirate Party, by hosting WikiLeaks, hopes to provide it a safe haven much as it's done for The Pirate Bay. "We hope that the new Parliament will give serious consideration to further strengthening Sweden’s press protection legislation," says Assange. "Western democracies are not always as free as one might think, and freedom of the press needs constant vigilance. In particular, we would welcome Sweden copying Iceland’s Modern Media Initiative, something that the Pirate Party also desires." Assange also says that he sees "more opportunities down the road" in which WikiLeaks and The Pirate Party can cooperate with one another. What this means is unclear. The Pirate Party, for its part, knows that by hosting WikiLeaks servers the threshold for the confiscation is much, much higher. "If the servers are placed at an ordinary web hotel the threshold is of course already high when it comes to making a raid and removing them," says Anna Troberg (PP), deputy leader of the Pirate Party. "But the political price for touching the servers of a political party is even higher. So we can offer them some added protection, of which they are in great need." Some have also argued that WikiLeaks lacks the publishing certificate needed for full press freedom protection in Sweden. Now that The Pirate Party is hosting WikiLeaks the matter is no longer of concern. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

Pirate Bay to Move to Swedish Parliament Server

Jared Moya — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:32:35 +0000

Swedish Pirate Party escalates the war between the entertainment industry and the BitTorrent tracker site by taking advantage of a part of the Swedish Constitution that gives MPs immunity from lawsuits or prosecution for actions performed as part of their political mandate.

It looks as though Swedish BitTorrent tracker site The Pirate Bay will get the last laugh in its long-running battle with the entertainment industry over accusations of copyright infringement. The Swedish Pirate Party has announced that it will make use of parliamentary immunity to protect the site from prosecution. The group has already been the site's ISP since this past May after the MPAA managed to convince a district court judge in Hamburg, Germany to issue a injunction against the site’s then Germany-based bandwidth provider, CB3ROB, and its owner, Sven Olaf Kamphuis. "But we want to go even further," says the group. "The Swedish Constitution is often ignored, but it contains an interesting detail. It says that MPs can not be sued or prosecuted for something that is done as part of their political mandate." "In practice, this implies total immunity for any political action taken within this working environment. Some of the Pirate Party's prospective MPs intend to use this to host the entire Pirate Bay from inside the parliament." It says the matter is really all about protecting free speech and Internet infrastructure, that copyright holders are trying to "sabotage and prevent" both The Pirate Bay's servers and users from communicating with one another. The Pirate Party observes a certain amount of symbolism in running the site from inside the country's parliamentary building. "The Pirate Party does this to protect several important values: Information security, fundamental freedom of expression, the future of Sweden as an industrial nation, and Sweden's reputation as leading the way into the future," it continues. "The Pirate Party consists of people who act on their resources where other politicians only appoint investigations and try to avoid responsibility." The most impressive part of The Pirate Party's argument is that it makes a connection between the file-sharing culture and "future industry skills." Copyright holders have a long track record of either preventing or delaying the creation of new technologies that interfere with its revenue streams. "In this context, The Pirate Bay is a global icon for freedom of speech, next generation of jobs, and future industries," it says. "Naturally, the previous generation of industries feel threatened by this icon. For this reason it wants to make the site a "national industrial interest" by hosting the site on the Swedish Parliament's servers. "The Pirate Party is the only political party that takes responsibility for our fundamental civil rights, our country's information security, and the talent of the next generation," it continues. Now all the Pirate Party needs is permission from The Pirate Bay's owners and place in parliament after the September 19th elections. It's curious that the Pirate Party has to protect the site at all. The Pirate Bay has never actually hosted any copyrighted material, and even quit hosting torrent trackers last November. All the site is a search engine, much as Google is, even though the search-engine giant loathes the comparison. Maybe Google will have a change of heart if the music industry ratchets up its DMCA complaints. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

Swedish Pirate Party: “We are Now the Pirate Bay’s ISP”

Jared Moya — Tue, 18 May 2010 15:21:03 +0000

After being temporarily disconnected by its previous Germany-based bandwidth provider CB3ROB.net, Rick Falkvinge, leader of the Pirate Party, says that "we got tired of Hollywood's cat-and-mouse game with The Pirate Bay and decided to offer the site bandwidth."

Yesterday Swedish BitTorrent tracker site The Pirate Bay fell victim to a injunction ordered by a district court judge in Hamburg, Germany against the site's Germany-based bandwidth provider, CB3ROB, and its owner, Sven Olaf Kamphuis. The injunction demanded that they disconnect The Pirate Bay or face massive fines of up to €250,000 ($317,475 USD) for each instance of infringement or, if this cannot be enforced, up to two years imprisonment. The injunction was requested by the MPAA which, after winning a conviction against the site for facilitation of copyright infringement last April, has ratcheted up its assault by targeting the ISPs that provide it bandwidth. The Pirate Bay insisted the downtime was only temporary, and true to its word, it's already back online thanks to the help of a natural ally - the Swedish Pirate Party. "We got tired of Hollywood's cat-and-mouse game with The Pirate Bay and decided to offer the bandwidth," says Rick Falkvinge, leader of the Pirate Party. "It is time to take the bull by the horns and stand up for what we believe is a legitimate activity." The offer careful avoids the sticky issue of torrent trackers, which are hosted in "other places." The Pirate Party will only deliver bandwidth to the home page and search engine function. "Pirate Bay is a search engine, and as such it is not responsible for the results," adds Falkvinge. He chastises other politicians and political parties for not being held accountable while it stands alone, and uses its own resources to defend the country's information security and fundamental freedom of expression. "We are now the Pirate Bay's ISP," says Falkvinge in a call to arms. The two form a natural alliance, especially being that anger over The Pirate Bay trial was largely responsible for the enormous surge in the Pirate Party's membership, culminating in its win of 2 seats in the EU Parliament last June. Falkvinge argues that Hollywood's attempts to censor The Pirate Bay from the Internet is really an attempt to "silence one of today's most important opinion makers in matters of civil liberties and rights on the web" and that "it is nothing less than political censorship, and something that any democratic-minded person must reject." As for The Pirate Bay, it's responded in it's usual mocking style, broken english and all.

PLZ LEARN: TPB CANT BE SHUT DOWN
LOL! AS U MITE HAS READ OR NOTICD, PEEPS ONCE AGAIN R TRYIN 2 SHUT US DOWN. DIS WILL NOT SUCCED, LOL. OURS RLY NICE WEBHOST WUZ THREATEND WIF RLY HUGE FINE, SO WE DECIDD 2 MOOV TEH SIET SO DAT THEY DIDNT GOT INTO TROUBLE, LOL. TEH DECISHUN 2 MOOV WUZ TAKEN BY US, TEH PIRATE BAY, LOL. TEH PIRATE BAY IZ AN UNSINKABLE SHIP. IT WILL SAIL TEH INTERWEBS 4 AS LONG AS WE WANTS IT 2. REMEMBR DAT, K THX. TPB, ONLY IN IT 4 TEH LULZ SINCE 2003

So now that The Pirate Bay and the Pirate Party have joined forces so to speak, it'll be quite interesting to see how the MPAA fights an entity with political muscle of its own. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

Anti-Piracy Group to Use Child Porn as Filtering Pretext

Jared Moya — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:21:36 +0000

Plan is to impose a "giant filter...(to) continuously monitor the child porn on the net, to show the politicians that filtering works," that some form of censorship is okay. Once it's established the entertainment industry would be able to demand additional filtering criteria, i.e. copyrighted material.

The entertainment industry is plotting a diabolical new tactic in the war against illegal file-sharing that even I must admit is ingenious. It involves using child pornography as a pretext for filtering the Internet. "Child pornography is great," International Federation of the Phonographic Industry lawyer Johan Schlüter told an audience recently a at Stockholm, Sweden seminar titled "Sweden — A Safe Haven for Pirates?”. ”It is great because politicians understand child pornography. By playing that card, we can get them to act, and start blocking sites. And once they have done that, we can get them to start blocking file-sharing sites." Exactly. It's the same sort of tactic it used in the past to convince NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to muscle ISPs into discontinuing free Usenet access in order to “shut down major sources of online child pornography." "I applaud Verizon, Time Warner Cable, and Sprint for working with my office to address this growing problem," he said at the time. "These companies are leading the industry and instituting new and innovative ways to stop their service from being used by people looking to distribute and access child pornography. I call on all ISPs to follow their example and help deter the spread of online child porn.” Never mind that it had little effect on the problem or that criminals simply switched to alternative methods. The truth didn't seem to matter so as long as it gave Cuomo a chance to sound tough on crime. Child porn is something everybody hates, and it gives politicians an easy chance at favorable press and copyright holders a toehold on filtering the Internet. ”One day we will have a giant filter that we develop in close cooperation with IFPI and MPA," continued Schlüter, apparently with a wide grin and sense of pride. "We continuously monitor the child porn on the net, to show the politicians that filtering works. Child porn is an issue they understand." Christian Engström, Member of the European Parliament for Piratpartiet, Sweden, elected to the body after an outpouring of support from the country's youth following the conviction of the Pirate Bay, was one of three pirates in attendance at the seminar, and describes the tactic best. "Start with child porn, which everybody agrees is revolting, and find some politicians who want to appear like they are doing something. Never mind that the blocking as such is ridiculously easy to circumvent in less than 10 seconds. The purpose at this stage is only to get the politicians and the general public to accept the principle that censorship in the form of ”filters” is okay," he says. "Once that principle has been established, it is easy to extend it to other areas, such as illegal file-sharing. And once censorship of the Internet has been accepted in principle, they can start looking at ways to make it more technically difficult to circumvent." He mentions how the tactic was already tested out years ago against the Pirate Bay. Back in 2007 the IFPI tried to get the BitTorrent tracker site included in a child porn blacklist maintained by police. The effort failed, but it was a shocking harbinger of things to come. "If the police would find anything wrong - shouldn’t they first contact us, then bring us in for questioning regarding the content, ask for our help or bring us to court for our wrongdoings?" Not once did authorities try to contact the Pirate Bay to verify the claims nor did they even have proof that child porn was available on the site. "The big film and record companies want censorship of the net, and they are perfectly willing to cynically use child porn as an excuse to get it," continues Engström. Child porn has also been used as a pretext for filtering in Australia where that country's Broadband Minister, Stephen Conroy, cited it as the reason for a voluntary Internet filtering regime. It quickly became mandatory and morphed to include P2P, video games, gambling, and other "inappropriate content." It's a filtering proposal that critics pointed out, and much to the delight of despots everywhere, would be even "stricter than Iran." In short, it's up to us to keep politicians honest and informed about any efforts to filter the Internet. The public may not have the financial resources of multinational entertainment corporations, but they do have a far more powerful weapon - their vote. Warn politicians that you're watching and educate friends and family members before it's too late. Perhaps even join a local Pirate Party. Either way, act before it's too late. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

Canada Gets Official Party Party

Jared Moya — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:23:20 +0000

Pirate Party of Canada becomes first officially recognized Pirate Party outside Europe.

As copyright holders get increasingly aggressive with pursuing anti-piracy legislation that restricts fair-use rights and online communication, critics around the globe are banding together to make sure their voices are part of the debate. Pirate Parties International was formed back in October of 2006 to serve as the umbrella organization that would coordinate the activities of and communications between national groups, each of which is dedicated to the principles of copyright and patent reform as well as the protection of personal privacy. The Swedish Pirate Party was the first of these national chapters, and so far the most successful. In last year's European Parliament elections it won 2 seats with some 7.13% of the vote, making it the country's third largest political party. Since then Pirate Party chapters have sprung up around the globe, from Argentina to Turkey, from the US to Italy, but until now none outside Europe have been officially registered. Canada is the first. "We are pleased to announce that as of April 12, 2010, the Pirate Party of Canada (PPCA) is officially eligible for Party Status," it says. "After ten months of dedication and hard work, we have reached eligible status, which only leaves a 60-day 'purgatory' period. After that, we will field candidates in subsequent federal elections, and begin the real work of a political party." It was last July that the Pirate Party of Canada first formed and began seeking members, and the road since then has been paved with difficulty, not the least of which is the insistence of the Green Party that Canada doesn't need a Pirate Party, that it's just as devoted to reforming an antiquated copyright system. The Pirate Party chalked up the Green Party's mention of copyright reform as a "huge early success" since it made no mention of the problem during the previous election. Since then it's been busy at work gathering the necessary forms and signatures and has been pleasantly surprised with the people's response. "It goes to show that you, normal Canadians who really run the country, care about what goes on behind the scenes, in the dark, closed board rooms and at the negotiating tables of ACTA, the RIAA, and the CRTC," it continues. "You’ve shown that we aren’t going to take the indignity of losing technological and cultural rights, so that record labels and big companies can further gouge us." From here it plans to begin "work in earnest" and "shift from mundane procedural tasks to real-world issues." If you're a Canadian citizen and interested in becoming a member you can register here. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

2009 – A ZeroPaid Year in Review – Part 2 of 3

Drew Wilson — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 19:42:36 +0000

We continue with our 2009 year in review with part two of our three part review. Part one of three.

May May started off with several stories pretty much happening at the exact same time. One of those stories was the increase in support for municipal broadband by major tech companies. Project Greenlight, the municipal broadband company that could in the US scored an uprising that caused more opposition toward the movement that would kill municipal broadband. The so-called "level the playing field" bills that would kill municipal broadband was ultimately sent to committee - that included the Senate version. Another story was the story about how Canada's presence on the priority watch listttttt started to lead many into believing that obstruct free trade in Canada in a bid to tighten copyright laws - a plan that never really panned out for the IFPI. Later on that month, the Conference Board of Canada suffered a major embarrassment when it was caught pirating a report to call for tough actions against piracy. If that wasn't bad enough, revelations quickly emerged that the Digital Economic Report by the Conference Board of Canada ignored independent research as well. Ultimately, the Conference Board of Canada withdrew the report. The constant drum beat of the so-called three strikes law continued throughout the month of May. The European Union re-opened a graduated response meaning the three strikes law was once again on the table. Later on, the three strikes law in Europe was once again killed - this time, for good. It dashed hopes for the major entertainment industry to have a three-strikes-and-your-out system in place for an entire continent. Meanwhile in France, in what seemed to be a very big point in the timeline of the Three Strikes Law in the country was one man voicing opposition to the three strikes law - an opinion that cost him his job, but gripped a nation with an interest in tech and political related issues. In spite of the political outcry, the French Three Strikes law was passed anyway. Then in Britain, a UK copyright group demanded that alleged file-sharers be disconnected from the internet, but the British ISPs stood firm and rejected the calls. Later back in France, there were revelations that the French Three Strikes law would see 1000 disconnections per day. The MPAA's overall success continued in May with the major success of Wolverine at the box office showing that movie leaks, once again, has no impact on cinema ticket sales. The CEO of LimeWire was caught up in Congress trying to convince regulators that the program is safe for consumption. This happened while congress was debating a law that would prevent inadvertent file-sharing. The RIAA, a few months in to an era they promised would be litigation free, filed even more lawsuits they promised they would never file. While they were making more enemies in that respect, they were also making enemies with an old ally - public radio. One of the RIAA's members higher ups also made the comment that nothing good ever comes out of the internet - a comment that drew anger from many places around the internet. The major political fallout of ThePirateBay guilty verdict continued to prove that there was political ramifications as The Pirate Party'sssss support continued to grow and was projected to win two seats in the EU Parliament. Meanwhile, a Swedish bank decided, in spite of an unsettled court case, decided to freeze the bank account of the admins of the BitTorrent site. The demands for a fair trial grew particularly when the admins demanded one. With a political backlash looming, the Swedish government did the unthinkable, push for more draconian laws affecting the internet - in this case, demand mandatory data retention for 6 months. After facing a major fine, prosecutors that miraculously managed to convict ThePirateBay admins demanded further fines and a gag order on the admins. They reiterated their demands saying a $3.6 Million fine was not enough. Supporting the conviction of ThePirateBay admins grew more challenging when news later broke about how the BSA admitted that losses due to piracy were entirely hypothetical - while obvious to most, a reaffirming admission nevertheless. Ultimately, ThePirateBay admins finally made things happen when it was decided that a three judge panel would decide whether or not the original judge that convicted the admins was biased. This happened at roughly the same time when polls continued to show that The Pirate Party was set to win at least one seat in the EU Parliament. Things continued to appear to be going in ThePirateBay admins favour when the courts rejected the demands for an additional fine and gag order. Things grew increasingly hairy when a Swedish minister was caught applauding the outcome of ThePirateBay trial. Meanwhile, The Pirate Party support gained a major supporter when a famousdish writer explained why he is voting for the party. While the year is filled with studies, one study in particular seemed to reaffirm many observers of the copyright debate's belief - a flat rate is, indeed, the way to go. The RealDVD trial kept making occasional appearances in the headlines as Real accused the MPAA of anti-trust violations. Privacy was also an issue that made headlines throughout the year. At one point, after France decided to push for three strikes law, the government took things a step further and pushed for legalizing the use of malware by police among other things. It was a law so draconian, few believed what they read when the story broke. The Joel Tenenbaum case re-emerged in the headlines as the Harvard Professor defending an alleged file-sharer suggested that file-sharing is "fair use". The Harvard Law professor later said that the RIAAs lawsuit campaign was an unconstitutional abuse of the law. Spain made it into the headlines when the record industry took P2P developer Pablo Soto to court over unfair competition. The Australian web filtering debate grew when confusing language emerged that the filtering would be voluntary mandatory. That didn't stop the Australian Christian Group from reiterating calls for a porn filter though. June June started off with Spanish citizens demanding internet civil rights. Probably facing huge pressure from the public, Spanish counterparts for the copyright industry later backed down from demanding a three strikes law for the country. With questions swirling about the future of the RIAAs filesharing lawsuit campaign, the RIAA went public to say that file-sharing lawsuits are not about the money but a "fair and reasonable" campaign. Things grew more tense around ThePirateBay trial's outcome. One artist even put one of his albums on the site to protest his art being used against the admins during the trial. Later on, time was up and the admins for The Pirate Bay urged European citizens to get out and vote - though they didn't exactly say for who, just get out and vote. Things seemed to just play in to Swedish The Pirate Party'sssss favour as the party then went on to win two seats in the EU Parliament. Meanwhile, things quickly went sideways for the admins of ThePirateBay when the three panel judge ruled that the original judge was not biased in making his guilty conviction. The Pirate Party's success didn't stop at the EU Election. The party proved to be growing in strength both nationally and internationally - many point out that the victory in Sweden inspired many others around the world to start their own national Pirate Parties. While the Pirate Party movement was growing stronger and stronger, the Swedish government decided to divert 15 police officials to investigating copyright infringement. Interestingly enough, shortly after that announcement, ThePirateBay formally launched its VPN service. Scrambling for some way to stop the overwhelming success of The Pirate Party, a Swedish politician made the unfortunate decision to equate Pirate Party Supporters with rapists. Bad news later emerged for ThePirateBay admins in the midst of all this when a court ruled that the original judge was not biased. By that point, many rumours circulated about the three judge panel being biased as well. Oddly enough, right after the ruling, the admins were issued a court summons via Twitter by Dutch anti-p2p organization BREIN. Also towards the end of the month, many in Sweden questioning the entire judicial system of Sweden. Things were going along smoothly PR-wise for ThePirateBay until news emerged that the website was sold. Many users then flocked to alternatives as a result, outraged and calling the admins "sellouts". This was, perhaps, the first time the admins experienced negative publicity from the public. Not to be forgotten, the Jammie Thomas trial took an interesting turn when lawyers moved to bar evidence provided by Media Sentry in the trial. The retrial of Jammie Thomas started later on that month. Unfortunately, in the same month, Jamie Thomas was also fined $1.92 Million for sharing a mere 24 songs. The MPAA's trial against RealDVD took a critical turn when the MPAA said that even making one DVD was illegal. Meanwhile, the MPAA found themselves admitting to losing the PR war to "the enemies of copyright". One might observe that the language further signalled a sort of more mean spirited language that later seems to be part of a later PR war. Controversy in Canada continued over the Conference Board of Canada's report when the CEO spoke out to do some damage control only to have an ex-employee counter the CEO's claims. Meanwhile, uncertainty about the Canadian government's ability to handle internet related issues grew when the governing party introduced mandatory ISP level surveillance legislation. Sadlypears for many that the governing party let Canadians down upon review of both surveillance bills. The response was swift as many Canadian newspapers responded by making mast-head editorials denouncing the surveillance legislation. Things started to look dicey on the political landscape in Canada when the Liberal party announced that they would combat piracy and ratify WIPO. The reason this was dicey because with the governing party and the Liberal party, there is enough votes to pass anything. Things looked dicey until the Liberal party, no doubt facing internal controversy, backtracked on calls to ratify WIPO and merely saying that their calls to ratify WIPO was merely to mark interest on the subject... honestly! While the copyright debate grew in Canada, news surfaced that BNN, a Canadian broadcaster, was accused of censoring the copyright debate by taking down several videos on the subject from YouTube. A report out of Russia suggested that the Russian government wanted internet anonymity abolished. A UK Minister, after the government faced even more pressure to change their minds on the three strikes law position, continued to defy the industry's calls for a three strikes law saying that such a law was "too draconian". One of the ways that the copyright industry exerted pressure onto the government was through a study that was cast in to doubt when reviewed. A UK ISP also said that the idea that one can stop file-sharing is "very naive". Another study in the UK suggested that losses due to piracy were fictitious and that if losses occurred, it wasn't due to file-sharing and piracy, but rather, gaming and DVDs. Undeterred by a botched PR campaign and growing scepticism about the anti-file-sharing movement, a copyright industry entity argued that a three strikes law was the way to go and that throttling was a waste of time. Frances LOPPSI 2 law that would allow police to upload malware received an expert review which had further insights and confirmation in the law. Meanwhile, fresh from passing the three strikes law, France went on to use military intelligence to shut down a private BitTorrent website. Later on that month, the French president was dealt with another embarrassing blow to his plans for a French Three Strikes Law when France's Constitutional Court ruled that the three strikes law was unconstitutional. Fresh from the PR loss of having the three strikes law ruled unconstitutional, French authorities reiterated that they would be going after Snowtiger donators and uploaders. It was that point in time that a new face of the three strikes law would emerge - a judge had to order the third strike and consequential disconnection. This new version seemed to catch on in other countries later on - at least, that's what other countries were pressured to adopt by the international copyright industry conglomerates. Interestingly enough, like the Swedish Pirate Party, the French Pirate Party was called a "hacker group". The party refuted being called a "hacker group". In New Zealand, after being forced to back peddle on implementing a three strikes law partly due to the major blackout protests, New Zealand gave signals that it would re-introduce the three strikes law in that country. Let's not forget that during this month was also the tenth anniversary of Napster. On the anniversary, KFPA Radio interviewed both Jared Moya and myself to discuss the implications of Napster's original release. Michael Geist marked the anniversary by debunking several file-sharing myths. CRIA, while still in possession of some PR credibility still at that point, freaked out about Michael Geist debunking the file-sharing myths and argued that the file-sharing problem was a "fact". Germany also made headlines when critics picked apart the mandatory DNS blacklist proposal. Civil unrest against the government, as a result of this, grew in the country. RapidShare, a German based company later in the month, was fined $33 Million for copyright violations. As a result, many started looking for alternatives to the one-click hoster though it never ultimately affected the services dominance in the one-click hosting industry. Germany wasn't the only country having political troubles trying to make ISP blacklists. Political tensions in Finland mounted when a Finnish transparency website was placed on the mandatory blacklist. With many internet related issues facing Germans and a government appearing to ignore their citizens, it might not be a surprise that after the success of the Pirate Party in the EU that the German counterpart managed to snag national seat from a defecting party member of another party. In spite of this, Germany passed surveillance legislation anyway. The United States made headlines in other ways as well. One of those headlines was ASCAP demanding an additional performance tax for ringtones. Curiously, Argentina made headlines for the first time this year here on ZeroPaid when the countries newspapers demanded to use data retention to go after alleged copyright infringers. Banking on the success of the previous victory by the copyright industry getting one Irish ISP to bring in a three strikes law, Irish counterparts of the copyright industry moved to try and pressure more ISPs in Ireland to put in place a three strikes policy. Australia continued to remain in the headlines with the governments plan to filter online video games as well. This was in the face of severe questions of how much of the internet the government was going to filter. If there was one issue all countries had reason to worry, it was the continued negotiations of ACTA. During June, consumer groups demanded that ACTA negotiations be halted. One of the concerns of ACTA was a complete lack of transparency. While artists supporting file-sharing is nothing new, another artist joined the ranks of many other artists who said that there were positives to file-sharing. Later on, Moby said that suing music fans is not a sustainable business model. July July saw what may be one of the biggest copyright related loss for the UseNet community. UseNet.com suffered a copyright infringement case loss. In the US, controversy kept rolling over ASCAPs decision to demand performance royalties on ringtones, but the EFF slammed ASCAP for the demands saying that ringtones are like music being heard on a car stereo system with the car windows rolled down. Towards the end of the month, the hearings on allowing exceptions to the DMCA made headlines when one lawyer argued that a user cannot access legal content forever and it's an over the top demand to say otherwise. July also reconfirmed that ThePirateBay had changed. The site made headlines when ThePirateBay announced that it would pay seeders money - all part of a new business model apparently. The acquisition seemed to go as smoothly as one could hope, but just days after the acquisition, things started to fall apart for the deal. The buyer of ThePirateBay was accused of insider trading. Still, The Pirate Party on the other hand was still enjoying the euphoria of their major victories on the national and international stage. In the process, they wrote an op-ed saying that copyright laws endanger people's digital freedom. The deal between ThePirateBay and Global Gaming Factory looked increasingly bleak as more questions were raised about the acquisition of the site - GGF refuted the questions, saying that the deal was going along smoothly. While the deal was going on, the MPAA echoed previous calls by other arms of the copyright industry to shutter ThePirateBay. Things in Canada got interesting when The Pirate Party of Canada landed on Canadian shores and began to establish themselves. Meanwhile, as BNN took heat for censoring the copyright debate, BNN responded to criticism saying that the videos were part of a broader round of takedowns and wasn't targeting the copyright debate in particular. A little bit of a political turf war was seen in Canada on the news that the Pirate Party were entering the political stage. The Green Party said that there was no need for a Pirate Party given that there was already a Green Party willing to take the issues to task. The Pirate Party responded to those comments. It was then that things really turned around in Canada when the governing party held a copyright consultation. Some were sceptical, but most embraced the government initiative (how often does that happen on issues like this?) with open arms - the consultation wound up being the most successful consultation ever in terms of number of responses. During the month though, the consultation seemed to be the talk of the town with many talking about copyright in and outside the consultation. Access Copyright hit the panic button and said that the entire copyright debate will rob creators of their livelihoods. The infamous Dream Pinball lawsuits in the UK took an interesting turn when wrongfully accused victims caught up in the lawsuit began to step forward. Meanwhile, the UK government started to show signs that they were weakening on their stance on copyright. The government said that they'll need time to start reducing P2P activity. While it seemed that UK ISPs stood firm against a three strikes law, one ISP, Karoo, suddenly implemented a three strikes policy on their own. Critics called the decision a "KangKaroo court". Interestingly enough, in the mean time, the UK music industry's own economist, as if an echo to the major success the MPAA begrudginglyy admitted, said that UKs music revenues were up by 4.7%, a different take considering a while back, there was suggestions that the UK music industry was suffering thanks to competition by the movie and gaming industry. Frances defiance of letting the three strikes law get away became more apparent this month upon word that judges would be given 5 minutes to rule on each disconnection - 5 minutes of work that required far more time to go through on a case-by-case basis. The PR war kept rolling on though when the French broadcaster that fired the employee for voicing his opposition to the three strikes law was sued over the incident. Meanwhile, the three strikes law was then delayed a few months. The Jammie Thomas case roared back into the headlines proving that the case wasn't over. After dealing with the blow of being fined millions, Jammie Thomas' legal council announced that they would be appealing the court decision - one of the reasons would be based on constitutional grounds of the fine in question. The back and forth action continued in the courtroom when the RIAA demanded that Jammie Thomas be barred from P2P. Jammie Thomas' legal council later confirmed that one of the reasons for appealing was because of constitutional questions being raised by the fine. The Joel Tenenbaum case made headlines when the RIAA cried fowl over the idea that the Media Sentry evidence should be suppressed on the basis of the company violating wiretapping and private investigation laws. When everyone thought that the EU-wide three strikes law was finished, there was word that one EU parliamentarian suggested that download regulations needed to be overhauled. Things got dramatic on the EU stage when one European anti-piracy group called The Pirate Party's message "criminal". New Zealand made headlines in July again when the government revealed a newer gentler three strikes law. In fact, one MP suggested that there should be a blank tax for P2P so as to legalize it. On a positive note, a Spanish judge in the same month ruled that not-for-profit P2P was legal. On a more sad note, July saw South Korea's three strike law go into force. Things grew somewhat scary when Finland mulled banning the activity of talking about DRM circumvention. It wasn't always bad news throughout the year for Australia. The government suggested that maybe there was a more appropriate way to deal with P2P - possibly warming up to the P2P movement in a way. In an odd turn of events, Australian ISPs suggested that the controversial filtering plan by the Australian government would not slow down internet speeds - one of the major criticisms of the Australian internet filtering plan. Creators continued to question the big copyright companies tactics with UK legend Stephen Fry comparing the RIAA to big tobacco companies. Lawrence Lessig weighed in himself on P2P saying that P2P is the new prohibition. As if to show one more sign that the file-sharing movement was pretty much unstoppable, one small developer was developing one method of putting a song into a picture that would be readable and played back into audio. What was particularly fascinating was seeing how one could manipulate sound via Photoshop - not exactly a conventional software for modifying sound, but video demonstrations proved that it was possible. August News about Joel Tenenbaum rolled right from July to August when word came out that Tenenbaum was fined $675,000 for sharing 30 works. After the ruling, Tenenbaum set up a website that accepted donations that would go towards fighting the RIAA in court. The Jammie Thomas case too made headlines when a revelation emerged that the US government was stepping in to demand that the judge throw out claims of unconstitutionality. It seemed as though BREIN made some inroads in a Dutch court when a judge ruled that ThePirateBay was legally obliged to block users from the Netherlands. Amidst the commotion surrounding ThePirateBay, Brokep, an admin of the BitTorrent site, announced that he was leaving the website. Undeterred by repeated bad news about the deal between GGF and ThePirateBay, rumours surfaced that the company planned to acquire even more BitTorrent sites once the current deal was wrapping up. Along side that were rumours that a major record label was about to make a deal with ThePirateBay. Of course, The IFPI wanted GGF to pay for ThePirateBay fine if the deal were to go through. Not liking the earlier ruling in a Dutch court, ThePirateBay then said that it would challenge the Dutch courts decision to force the website to block Netherlands traffic. It was then that GGF made another bold move by announcing that it was negotiating a licensing agreement with a performing rights organization. Unfortunately, shortly after the announcement, GGFs stock was halted until the company produced the cash it promised to buy ThePirateBay. Trying to salvage the acquisition of ThePirateBay, GGF publicly disclosed their grand plan to legitimize ThePirateBay. Unfortunately for GGF, police began to suspect insider trading. Legal troubles for ThePirateBay continued when a Swedish court ordered a Swedish ISP to block ThePirateBay. Towards the end of the month, GGF investors abandoned ThePirateBay acquisition. The escapade wasn't over though as GGF then said that GGF investors approved of the plan to acquire ThePirateBay. Things went south again when tax collectors seized GGF CEOs assets that would go to paying back taxes. In France, steamed by the slow progress of the French Three Strikes Law, a special session was set aside to deal with the law as quickly as possible. Stunningly, there was movement again to neuter provisions in the EU telecoms package that would once again revive the EU-wide three strikes law. Meanwhile, in Canada, the copyright consultation continued to prove to be a hit amongst Canadians with more and more submissions continuing to pile up. Remarkably, while all this was happening, the copyright industry had the audacity to call for a Canadian three strikes law. It would prove to be one of the last calls to do so in the year as well. Coincidently, the Canadian Manitoba Music industry, during a round table, shunned CRIAs stance as if to re-highlight the rift between Canadian record labels and CRIA. Things continued to remain interesting in Canada's copyright consultation when DOC supported the expansion of "fair dealings". More calls to expand Canada's fair dealings continued to roll in to the consultation. Adding fuel for the demands for a more liberal approach to copyright, the ESA pointed out that the Canadian gaming industry grew without the need of a Technical Protection Measure or anti-circumvention law in place. No doubt freaking out about the whole consultation process and where it turned, the copyright industry was probably scrambling for a plan. It got one, but stacking the town hall meeting in their favour didn't exactly go over very well for Canadians. In an almost symbolic move, an American music group called the idea of a fair copyright law in Canada "disgusting". The NDP, the political group that sparked that comment responded, saying that they make no apology for their stance on copyright. With other countries having suggested that they would filter the internet, Malaysia suggested that it, too, plans to filter the internet. Germany saw one MP renew calls to legalize file-sharing, saying that a neutral stance of a blank tariff was the way to go. At the end of the month, the German Pirate Party even won several government seats. Things started to grow dark in Australia when ISPs essentially asked via proposed legislation to become copyright cops. In the UK, the criticism about "KangKaroo Courts" gained momentum when UK ISP Karoo backed down from plans to implement a three strikes policy and, instead, require a court order. With all this uncertainty about the digital future of the UK, it was probably no surprise when news emerged that the UK managed to get their own Pirate Party. The timing of this couldn't be better since it was just a short while later that the UK government turned around on its initial stance of not legislating in a three strikes law and seriously planned on a p2p crackdown. The British Pirate Party quickly built a name for themselves, writing a provocative piece on why the cost to fight file-sharing was "too high". It was then that the UK government pretty much made it official that it would disconnect file-sharers after all. A British ISP was dismayed at the governments change of heart on the issue of disconnecting file-sharers and said that the war on file-sharing was futile. This caused the British government to be on the defencive with their plan to disconnect alleged file-sharers. Things grew bleak for Mininova in August when a court ordered the site to remove all copyrighted content. Things seemed to start to turn around in Finland upon news that a Finnish Pirate Party was officially registered in the country. One Irish ISP went along with the idea of blocking ThePirateBay, but it turns out that it was the only ISP willing to do so at that time. The Irish Pirate Party announced its opposition to the ISP decision. The MPAA's war on RealDVD seemed to draw to a close in August when a judge barred the sale of RealDVD. One artist in August said that P2P was a global word of mouth, becoming yet another creative that said that there were positive attributes for file-sharing. Stay tuned for the final part of the review. Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.