National Meeting Log 20090519

Meeting Log This page contains a transcript or log of a meeting that occurred on the 19th of May, 2009. It should be used for reference only and does not need to be edited.

<stephenlark> reading https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Road_To_Registration
<Roderick> ah yeah. the only real aec role required is really a party secretary.
* fraggature ([email protected]) has joined #PPAu
<Roderick> hi fraggature :)
* Roderick gives voice to fraggature
<fraggature> Hola
* Hiroki ([email protected]) has joined #PPAu
<Roderick> so apart from that registered officer/party secretary, there aren't really any other aec requirements regarding roles.
* Roderick gives voice to Hiroki
<fraggature> Ok
<Roderick> so i guess, with the drafting of the constitution, we'd have to just make a structure where by members would cast their vote, or direct their vote via a proxy.
<Roderick> because i assume, we'd want that position to be democratically selected
<Brendan> cool
<Brendan> Brendan fuer Fuehrer!
<Roderick> haha
<fraggature> Dude, English, please
<Roderick> now, there was some discussion re: censorship, and someone wanted to continue that discussion?
<Roderick> I personally can't fathom that anyone would not want it as part of the platform, and want to start elaborating on 'good' and 'bad' censorship.
<Roderick> for me that's a grey area.
<Roderick> i don't believe in the governments right to decide what is good for me, or not good for me or any other person, but that's just me.
<fraggature> Same here
<stephenlark> agreed
<fraggature> Although there are people who would kill themselves without being told what they can't do
<fraggature> I call them 'special'
<Roderick> so in relation to the filter, i'd probably like to take the stand that the government has no business in filtering or censoring anyones internet connection, I don't mind that the government may make available information for parents to censor what their children might see etc, that's their own prerogative.
<Ycros> aye
<Roderick> haha yeah, some people are hopeless - but i think the majority of australians are fairly rational, well educated and don't need to be babied by the government.
<Roderick> so i guess that we're in agreement that no censorship is a platform?
<stephenlark> agreed
<fraggature> yes
<Hiroki> Mmhm.
<fraggature> nut calling most Australians rational is taking it a little too far, sadly :(
<Roderick> good. now that survey idea Ycros was throwing about, anyone have any input on it?
<fraggature> either that or I live in the idiot are of the country
<Ycros> Roderick: yeah. I guess asking how people feel about censorship in the survey would be good
<Roderick> lol fraggature 
<Roderick> yep - i think we should develop two kinds of surveys - one for pp members, and one that is available to the general public.
<Roderick> so that we might gauge sentiment etc, but yep, i think just generally asking people broad questions on the issues the party is based on might be a good starting point.
<Ycros> why would they be different?
<fraggature> In the interest of my area of the country, explain some words in the general public version
<Hiroki> You don't want to get too specific
<Roderick> i guess i thought the one for the members might be more in regards to specific policy questions, but now that you raise it, they won't be all that different.
<Ycros> yeah. It's not like we have proper membership yet anyway, since we're not incorporated or registered with the AEC yet.
<fraggature> how close are we though?
<Roderick> well, we have to convert the civicrm/email expressions of interest into formal memberships, of which i guess there are about 150
<Roderick> but that is without the slightest bit of promotion, so i don't think that one we solidify policy/structure it'll be hard to come by the 500 members necessary.
<Roderick> but then again, i have no rational for that except for a 'good feeling' :P
<Roderick> so just gear a survey to assess general public sentiment.
<Ycros> okay, yeah, I'm willing to spend some time in the next week or so getting together some questions around some of the policy stuff we have up on our wiki
<fraggature> Once the policy and structure are good enough I'm going to tell all my friends to join, and they will invite their friends, and if others do the same we will have 500 in no time
<Ycros> anyone else want to contribute?
<Ycros> maybe start a wiki page for it
<Roderick> i'll be more than willing to give a hand in its creation.
<Roderick> and from what i understood in David's email, he's wanting to explore it too. So yeah, I think a wiki page might be in order.
<fraggature> as in Wikipedia page? Or another wiki page on the site?
<Roderick> just a page on our wiki
<Ycros> as in https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
<Ycros> it's running the same software as wikipedia, so don't get confused
<Ycros> but it has the pirate party logo in the corner
<fraggature> Yeah, I know, just wasn't sure which you were reffering to
<Roderick> are you Ycros on the wiki also?
<Ycros> Roderick: I'm just signing up for an account now
<Roderick> cool
<Roderick> so I guess we'll just work on that until next week's meeting, and see if we can get something together by then.
<Roderick> just a basic outline at least.
<Roderick> The next thing on the agenda was what David/Quinny raised last week, re: a youth organisation.
<Roderick> the jung pirat in sweden seems to have been very successful.
<Ycros> ah, so they do have something there as well
<Ycros> it makes sense
<Roderick> yeah, organisations like that seek copyright expansion also like to target youth, with imposing and threatening posters
<Roderick> and with slogans like filesharing is theft etc,
<Roderick> so its only natural that we counter that sort of propaganda
<fraggature> Wait, there are yoth crazy enough to join it?
<fraggature> Now I've seen everything
* Brendan has quit (Ping timeout)
<Ycros> fraggature: well, I mean, there are people that aren't quite voting age yet that are interested
<Ycros> and they can't be official members of a registered party as far as I know
<Ycros> it would suck to alienate them
<Ycros> since they'd be future members
<fraggature> I was talking about what Roderick said
<Ycros> OH
<Ycros> yeah, sorry I didn't quite read that properly
<Roderick> haha they aren't poster to join anti piracy campaigns, but just threaten and alarm youth about the 'dangers' of file sharing.
<Roderick> and although we can't encourage file sharing, we can say it shouldn't be a crime, and shouldn't incur government sanction.
<fraggature> that would just encourage them
<Ycros> Roderick: like in Spain?
<fraggature> <3 Spain
<Roderick> wasn't there some recent legislation introduced in spain?
<Roderick> or was that just rumored?
<Ycros> ooo, dunno, I should check my torrentfreak news feed
<Roderick> i think i'm wrong.
<Ycros> I know the US wasn't happy with it
<fraggature> I don't remember reading anything from TorrentFreak about it
<Ycros> and they issued a statement saying they should clean up their act RE: filesharing
* Brendan ([email protected]) has joined #PPAu
<Brendan> -.-
<Roderick> yeah, they've labelled countries like Canada pirate nations because of a lack of 'enforcement'
* ChanServ sets mode +a #PPAu Brendan
* ChanServ gives channel operator status to Brendan
<fraggature> :O
<fraggature> I don't remember hearing about people voting for them to be world police...
<Roderick> yeah, i don't remember that election either.
<fraggature> Maybe we should tell them it didn't happen, or wait till April 1 next year and then tell them April Fools :3
<Roderick> lol
<fraggature> "Dear America,
<fraggature> April Fools!!! You're not the world Police
<fraggature> Love,
<Roderick> anyway, i guess a youth organisation is definitely on the cards, we'd just need someone to co-ordinate it.
<fraggature> The World"
<Roderick> haha
<Roderick> they do seem to be one of the main drivers behind treaties like acta
<Roderick> which would seem to want greater criminal sanctions imposed for copyright infringement
<Roderick> and would necessarily require further intrusion into people's privacy to be enforced.
<fraggature> the day the ACTA is signed is the day I send all my friends TrueCrypt
<Ycros> wasn't there someone in here that was under voting age?
<Roderick> Brendan if I'm not mistaken?
<fraggature> Me and Hiroki, but I'm 18 next year, he is the year after
<Ycros> mmk
<Roderick> i'll say that we'll put the youth organisation on the back burner for now.
<Roderick> until we get some more traction at least.
<stephenlark> agreed
<Roderick> now, the term of copyright infringement.
<Roderick> like i said last week, the term the swedes put forward is 5 years.
<Brendan> Roderick: hi
<Roderick> the first copyright act in the us, if i'm not mistaken was 14 years.
<Brendan> I'm 18 next year
<Brendan> and already registered to vote
<Brendan> there is no issue
<Roderick> ah
<Roderick> sweet.
<Ycros> Roderick: was 14 the "optimum" - you kept mentioning that someone worked that out, who?
<fraggature> you're rigistered to vote already? didn't know you could do it before you're 18
<Brendan> fraggature: you turn 17 and they send you a letter
<Brendan> REGISTER OR DIE
<Brendan> and you go
<Brendan> OH OK
<Ycros> yeah, I thought it wasn't exactly 18
<fraggature> WHERE IS MY LETTER THEN!
<Brendan> it'll come
<Roderick> rufus pollock http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/07/research-optimal-copyright-term-is-14-years.ars
<Ycros> I don't know if party membership is based on "is registered voter" or "is over 18" or both
<Ycros> I was under the impression that it was just if you're registered to vote
<Brendan> is member = is member
<Brendan> :P
<fraggature> lazy Government, probably ran out of money for coffee so they had to take it from the 'useful' funds
<Roderick> yeah, that was calculated to be 14-15 years. i think the spanish party settled at 20 years.
* Hiroki[m] ([email protected]) has joined #PPAu
<Ycros> 14 years sounds okay. Still a long time
<Roderick> it is, but in comparison to the monopoly granted by the current system, it's minuscule - life + 70 years is outrageous.
<stephenlark> agreed 14 years
<fraggature> 14 is good
<Roderick> and abolition i don't think is a viable policy. as an economic ideal, perhaps.
<Ycros> Roderick: yeah
<Ycros> and even then
<Ycros> if we get it down to 14
<stephenlark> what about Creative Commons?
<Ycros> then we can think about where to go from there
<Ycros> stephenlark: what do you mean?
<Brendan> I agree with 14 years
<stephenlark> should CC (a new copyright system http://creativecommons.org/) be advocated as well as reform of the existing copyright system?
<Brendan> I dont agree with advocating anything
<Brendan> we aren't the FSF
<Roderick> Well, Creative Commons wouldn't be necessary in a post copyright reform world I guess, if those values are enshrined within the legislation.
<Ycros> CC isn't a new copyright system though
<Ycros> CC is a licensing system, which only works because of copyright
<stephenlark> right, got it
<Roderick> whether those licenses would stand as contracting the user out of copyright in court is another issue too, i guess.
<Roderick> sort of like using the fox to guard the hen house in some respects.
<Roderick> Not that I don't think they've achieved great things with CC licensing etc
<Roderick> so generally, a term of 14 years can be said to be, for the time being reasonable?
<Brendan> yds
<Brendan> yes*
<Roderick> I can then go ahead, and put that into the policy, and we should have something to be ratified by next meeting.
<fraggature> yeah
<stephenlark> agreed
<Roderick> I've been intermittently adding to the initial policy draft
<Ycros> aye
<Roderick> So I said a meeting this coming Thursday, at 8 - if no one has objection to that, I'd like us to pick a day we can just regularly state will be a day for the meeting.
<Roderick> do you have a preference for which evening you'd want?
* Quinny ([email protected]) has joined #PPAu
<fraggature> I'm fine with either Tues or Thurs
<Roderick> Hi Quinny
* Roderick gives voice to Quinny
<Quinny> Hello
* Roderick gives voice to Hiroki[m]
<stephenlark> any night
<Roderick> We were just up to deciding what day/time people would prefer.
<Roderick> Ok, well Thurs aren't the best for me, but Tues I prefer.
<Quinny> any night except monday is ok with me.
<Roderick> Brendan, Ycros?
<fraggature> Tuesday is looking like the best choice
<Roderick> sweet. so far Quinny we've tentatively agreed to 14 years from publication as the term of copyright we'd put forward.
<Ycros> Tues is okay
<Roderick> Youth organisation is on the back burner until we start promotion.
<Quinny> Roderick - is that for everything?
<Roderick> Well, patents as yet, haven't been discussed?
<Roderick> Or do you mean differing copyrights for different mediums?
<Quinny> I meant different mediums, but if you are past that part of the meeting please carry on and I will read the logs later.
* Hiroki[m] has quit (Quit: iPhone)
<Roderick> Well, I don't mind returning to it, but copyright is currently uniform if I'm not missing something? I think it would introduce unnecessary complexity to have staggered copyright terms.
<Roderick> What'd you have in mind?
<Roderick> But you're thinking about software I guess?
<Quinny> Yes, I think 14 years is too long for software, but I agree that making it uniform across all mediums makes sense.
<Quinny> So 14 years sounds ok
<Roderick> Yeah, patents is something we should discuss maybe next meeting - things like intangible property, business methods, software, living organisms and genes should not be patentable
<Roderick> imo
<fraggature> wait, you can patent living organisms and genes?
<Ycros> yeah
<Ycros> fraggature: yep
<fraggature> o_O someone must have been smoking too much to come up with that.....
<Roderick> http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/05/13/genes.patent.myriad/index.html
<Roderick> for instance
<Roderick> I guess the most notorious in that field would be monsanto 
<Roderick> patenting genetically modified seeds, and animals.
<Roderick> demanding that farmers pay licensing fees for the seeds they use etc.
<fraggature> Hell, why not just patent breathing....
* Roderick goes to the patent office...
<Roderick> :P
* fraggature punches Roderick
<fraggature> my idea
<Roderick> but yes, in australia you are able to apply for patents for new breeds of plants
<Roderick> they're known as plant breeders rights
<fraggature> In that article you showed me, it says that the 2 genes were part of heredetry breast and ovary cancer, does that mean you could sue them because their genes gave you cancer?
<Roderick> haha
<Roderick> www.ipaustralia.gov.au/pdfs/patents/specific/Australian%20Patents%20for%20Plants.pdf
<Roderick> But yep, if theres nothing anyone wants to raise, I'll put a discussion of patents etc on the agenda for next meeting, and we'll go from there?
<stephenlark> agreed
<Ycros> yep
<Quinny> yep
<fraggature> sure
<Roderick> Anything else you'd like to put on the agenda for next week?
<Roderick> I'll start drafting the membership forms too.
<fraggature> yay :D
<Roderick> Ok, I'll take that as not much. Hopefully Brendan can up use his skills to up these logs.
<Roderick> We'll have the meeting on Thurs re: patents, and from then on every Tuesday.