Pirate Party Politician Fights Piracy (Of Her Book)

[Andy Chalk]

Great! Why not take what you just wrote and merge it into the article instead of saying she's directly responsible for the takedown, and change the headline accordingly?

Because she is responsible. Look at it this way: whether I kill a guy, or I pay you to kill a guy, I'm still responsible for that guy being dead. Every step she took from the moment she signed that contract is in direct opposition to what the Pirate Party and its supporters stand for. She's not an innocent bystander or a naive youngster blindsided by a corporate machine; she's an informed and active participant in the process.

 

[GAunderrated]

OK, I'm a bit confused. Because from what I can tell, it's actually her publisher who has something against the piracy, not her. And she says that when her deal with the publisher runs out, in 10 years, she'll happily make it available for free after it's up to her.

By my count, all she's guilty of is poor negotiation between herself and her publisher regarding the copyright issue. But I can see why it's more fun to just call her a hypocrite and thus try to invalidate any opinion she has or stands for

Warning. Title is Missleading.

She's not the one issuing the take down reports. Her publisher, whom she sold the copyrights to is.

Still a bit hypocritical, but not as much as the title implies.

THANK YOU!

Except, as someone who hates copyright in all it's forms, and as a prominent member of a political party that upholds those beliefs, you can't then sign up to a lucrative copyright contract and not expect to catch some flack!

That's not what bothers me. What bothers me is the article. Misleading as hell, makes her look even worse than it should by stretching the truth.

*looks up to see journalist who wrote this*..... ah crap I got tricked again by andy's fox news style journalism into stretching the truth to raise ratings. Seriously I think I just need to outright assume all of andy's articles are not accurate information. It's getting a bit stupid when tons of his articles people are calling him out on his BS. Come on editor of escapists, hold him to a higher standard please!

 

[Geth Reich]

Can you blame people for wanting a piece of her booty?

Hi-oooooooooooooooooooooh!

I like how she says she'll release the book for free in ten years time when she gets the copyright back-looooong after everyone whose interested will have had to have forked out cash.

 

[UnSub]

Great! Why not take what you just wrote and merge it into the article instead of saying she's directly responsible for the takedown, and change the headline accordingly?

Because she is responsible. Look at it this way: whether I kill a guy, or I pay you to kill a guy, I'm still responsible for that guy being dead. Every step she took from the moment she signed that contract is in direct opposition to what the Pirate Party and its supporters stand for. She's not an innocent bystander or a naive youngster blindsided by a corporate machine; she's an informed and active participant in the process.

Also, the TorrentFreak article points out that even the copies hosted on the Pirate Party website have been taken down.

Chalk's article is fine. Schramm's representatives - the ones she signed the contract with - are out fighting the piracy of her book. Schramm appears to have only publically indicated she now doesn't like her contract (now she is embarrassed about it) and isn't even doing the whole "steal my book" bit.

IP rights are meant to be Schramm's area of interest. In signing the contract, she should have looked very carefully at those particular areas and what they meant. Instead, either willfully or naively, she signed and got a large advance and now doesn't really have a platform to stand on when commenting on reducing other peoples' IP rights when she is directly benefiting from a publisher protecting hers.

So yes, she is responsible for this situation. Her alternative was to not take the deal and trust her book to the IP-free ideals she claims to believe in. Make the book public domain and ask for donations if people want to. Schramm didn't.

(And the problem with believing she was naive is that if she doesn't understand how such things really work, how can you trust the reasoning of her other anti-IP positions?)

 

[Aeonknight]

If she was a true pirate she would've never sold it to the publisher in the first place.

But if she didn't sell it to a publisher then how could she encourage the pirating of it?

Yeah, didn't think of that did you. :crosses arms: uts on sunglasses:

But is she actually encouraging the pirating of it? Based on the OP her blog only listed lines from the book. If she wanted to encourage the pirating of it she'd have torrent links instead!

 

[AnarchistFish]

Who issued the notices? Her or the publishers?

 

[Parnage]

Once again the people who want to dictate how you live your life and make your money turns out to be just as corrupt and ignorant as they claim others to be. Of course she didn't know that they might protect her rights as an author, she is so torn up at the idea as she counts her money and enjoys the dream of publishing a book. Yeah I am sure her book will be very much interesting and relevant in ten years when she will release it for free. Right?

Double-standards are to be expected of people like this, they want you to give up your intellectual property for free but they never mention giving away their own. Most likely as Julia Schramm has shown they rarely have any to start with.

 

[ShadowKatt]

Let me get this straight......
This Pirate Party wants to not just allow, but ENCOURAGE everyone to copy anything they want. They think IP's are horrible and copyright is an evil worthy of breaking the tinfoil hats out for?

Did I fall into a parallel anti-Earth or something? Do they even know why these things exist in the first place? Do they even know how the world works????

No, you're not in a parallel earth. It's a party of people that believe that information should be freely available and that DIGITAL piracy should not be criminalized in any way. Which I can actually get behind.

However, just because they're advocating it doesn't make it any less illegal.

 

[Greni]

And suddenly, to break up the mad ramblings of people not reading the thread, and the people correcting the people that didn't read the thread:

 

[maxmanrules]

Oh man, this is hilarious. I hope no one ever takes her seriously ever again.

I would point out that it's not her doing it, it's the copyright licensor, which is Random House.
I think someone else may have pointed this out as well, but meh.

 

[Soak]

Great! Why not take what you just wrote and merge it into the article instead of saying she's directly responsible for the takedown, and change the headline accordingly?

Because she is responsible. Look at it this way: whether I kill a guy, or I pay you to kill a guy, I'm still responsible for that guy being dead. Every step she took from the moment she signed that contract is in direct opposition to what the Pirate Party and its supporters stand for. She's not an innocent bystander or a naive youngster blindsided by a corporate machine; she's an informed and active participant in the process.

Lets say, i see the point you're making - hope i do - i still disagree and have to say, every court would as well, at least they would call it differently.
Aside from your simile being out of scale, as you put it, you seem to accuse both of murder. However, only one actually killed the guy, the other was at most instigating the killing. Not only that, but i see the case different as well. Look at it this way (following your simile): Someone offers me a lot of money to borrow a firearm from me and use it on my lawn. I'm glad i own no firearms and if i would, i (hope i) wouldn't be stupid enough to go for the deal, because possible consequences of someone using a firearm on my lawn include someone else shot at, at least close to my lawn. And if someone got shot on my lawn, i would still plead for "not guilty" and hope to get through with it.
She was stupid enough to go for the deal, not with a killer, but with the evil "content mafia", but still, she isn't throwing those takedown notices at her innocent co-pirates by herself, but the "content mafia" is. And as already said, several times by now, she is still to blame and hold responsible for her stupidity of signing that stupid contract to the evil, stupid "content mafia", but that won't change the facts into what you make it sound like.
You may interpret and publish it every way you like, that's part of the right of free press, which is a good thing of course, but, though it was and still is often a point of discussion, i learned in my studies of journalism, that as a good journalist, you should always stick to the facts (in short).

And suddenly, to break up the mad ramblings of people not reading the thread, and the people correcting the people that didn't read the thread:

*yaarrr harr me mates*

 

[Robert Ewing]

*takes off glasses. Puts hand over face* SIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Seriously though, what the hell is going on.

 

[rbstewart7263]

shes quite pretty.

 

[GenGenners]

Let me get this straight......
This Pirate Party wants to not just allow, but ENCOURAGE everyone to copy anything they want. They think IP's are horrible and copyright is an evil worthy of breaking the tinfoil hats out for?

Did I fall into a parallel anti-Earth or something? Do they even know why these things exist in the first place? Do they even know how the world works????

No, you're not in a parallel earth. It's a party of people that believe that information should be freely available and that DIGITAL piracy should not be criminalized in any way. Which I can actually get behind.

However, just because they're advocating it doesn't make it any less illegal.

Piracy is still piracy though, digital or otherwise. It's just the same thing distributed in a different format. I don't see why they think it deserves special treatment.

 

[Dastardly]

Pirate Party Politician Fights Piracy (Of Her Book)

Actually, it sounds to me like it's her publisher fighting it. She, as the article even mentions, doesn't own the rights to the book at the moment.

The publisher put the book out there, but it doesn't necessarily mean they believe its message. They advanced her the money and they want to earn it back... but it doesn't seem to me like she is leading this charge. It seems more likely that they put her name on the order, since really she doesn't have any legal ground to do so herself.

We can argue that she shouldn't have gotten into bed with a publisher to begin with, but we might do well to consider that copyright protection is just one of the services a publisher offers. Self-publishing is all well-and-good, but for folks just starting out, publishers can offer tons of help:

1. getting the book finished
2. making it look nice
3. getting it distributed
4. advertising it

All of that stuff is self-pay for the self-published, and you're probably not sitting on a thousands-deep rolodex of contacts to draw from. It's clear that she negotiated a ten-year term to return copyright, which means she's not in it for the standard lifelong haul.

I think it's an oversimplification to brand her a hypocrite here (and that's from a guy who despises the piracy hypocrisy).

 

[Strazdas]

Let me get this straight......
This Pirate Party wants to not just allow, but ENCOURAGE everyone to copy anything they want. They think IP's are horrible and copyright is an evil worthy of breaking the tinfoil hats out for?

Did I fall into a parallel anti-Earth or something? Do they even know why these things exist in the first place? Do they even know how the world works????

obviuosly more than you. Copyright is not bad. The way copyright has been used in the world for the last, say, 30 years is a spawn of evil and must be destroyed at all costs.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

I think I'll put some of this irony in the fridge for later, it's so damn delicious I can't quite manage all of it right now.

But where will you store all the excess hypocrisy if your fridge is full of irony?

 

[GenGenners]

Let me get this straight......
This Pirate Party wants to not just allow, but ENCOURAGE everyone to copy anything they want. They think IP's are horrible and copyright is an evil worthy of breaking the tinfoil hats out for?

Did I fall into a parallel anti-Earth or something? Do they even know why these things exist in the first place? Do they even know how the world works????

obviuosly more than you. Copyright is not bad. The way copyright has been used in the world for the last, say, 30 years is a spawn of evil and must be destroyed at all costs.

Then they should attack the abusers of copyright, or facilitate the advancement of correct copyright usage, not try to kill the idea of copyright itself. It's like a doctor cutting off your leg to stop your foot hurting because, well, at least your foot won't hurt anymore, right?

 

[tzimize]

BWAH HAH HAH HAH HAH!

Sorry, when I first read the title, I was just thinking to myself "Please all that is Holy let this be what I think it is!"

For once, I am not disappointed.

I'm not sure if this bit of news has therefore reduced or restored some of my faith in humanity.

Aaaand that many posts is how many it took before (some) people got the picture. Title of article is misleading, text of article is mediocre at best. I expect better from this site. The escapist is a serious website. Right?

Also, it annoys me that so many people can read this article (or the headline only maybe...) and not read between the lines.

 

[Stu35]

Warning. Title is Missleading.

She's not the one issuing the take down reports. Her publisher, whom she sold the copyrights to is.

Still a bit hypocritical, but not as much as the title implies.

I feel that this can't be quoted enough given that 4 pages in people are still relishing the "irony" of this situation with all the glee of jackals who have come across a wounded pregnant gazelle.


Of course, it is a little bit funny that this has happened, and it can't reflect well on the Pirate Party as a whole.