I don’t necessarily think that they are taking money on either side of the Atlantic. I think that both sides are getting “perks” that they can, in their own minds, say “I’m not taking a bribe.” but they are still getting “perks of office.” Maybe I’ve been made cynical by the abuses that we have seen over the last several years in the American government, which IMHO is way out of control, but I think that the people at the top feel entitled because of their positions.

So the problem comes down to we “the community” have the time, people and money resources to hire great lawyers, lobbyists and others to pester politicians into accepting our positive legislation proposals. Deep pockets and motivated people are needed for this unfortunately. And I’m not sure we are in a position to do this.

Is American politics really that explicitly corrupt? I can quite literally buy a law and no-one minds?

I give you a case in point, and that would be Senator Ernest “Fritz” Hollings (D-SC). “Although he represents South Carolina, Hollings is sometimes known as the “Senator from Disney” because of his eagerness to support the interests of the motion picture and record industries and their lobbying arms, the Motion Picture Association of America and the Record Industry Association of America.” He was about any pro-MPAA/pro-RIAA legislation that came down the pike, and he was clearly on Disney’s payroll.

As for the repeated bills like ACTOR, and all of these, the anti-freedom groups get their heads handed to them, so they try a different tack to try to get the restrictions through.

Just remember, all that has to happen for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

–vr

1. lots of other people in your constituency feel as you do, in which case one of you should run, and win the seat
2. hardly anyone else in your constituency feels as you do, in which case you are a tiny minority and that, basically, means that you don’t get representation (and it’d be no better if your MP was merely the mouthpiece of his constituency, since she’d ignore you as a minority too)

Reform is direly needed.

The healthcare reform was a rather simple thing to put into words that everyone could understand. And it’s the same with net neutrality. But when it comes to freedom of sharing information things get a little bit harder.

I mean what do you expect exactly ?.. laws to ban DRM .. or proposals not to incriminate teenagers for downloading a song ?

YES! That is exactly what I want. Someone out there trying to codify my rights instead of restrictions on them. Who cares if it won’t be passed this year or this decade? Keep trying! Get these ideas in people’s heads!

It took my country decades to pass even shite healthcare reform, but it got done. Sometimes you just have to wear the “enemy” down.

But, may I please ask where the photo is from? EG The flickr page it came from maybe? I ask because I am 99% sure I used to know someone in the photo, and wanted to have a closer look etc.

Thanks. = )

But, may I please ask where the photo is from? EG The flickr page it came from maybe? I ask because I am 99% sure I used to know someone in the photo, and wanted to have a closer look etc.

Thanks. = )

I certainly agree that a number of these big business lobby groups are strongly influencing laws that feel draconian, but obviously they have sufficiently good reasons that they’re able to convince politicians who are the one who actually have to vote them in. If the ORG and other similar lobby groups have better arguments, then they should win. Perhaps the arguments are not sufficiently strong, and I wonder why that is. Is the majority of the public not sufficiently interested/educated about the rights they enjoy today to make these kinds of bills important political issues? Do they take it all for granted, and don’t feel they can do anything about it when some of those rights are given up for thinly veiled commercial or other narrow interests? I get the impression that the level of education in the community is much higher than, say, 50 years ago, but that we’re a lot less aware of the importance of some things, especially civil rights (look at how long the US Govt refused habeus corpus for Australian David Hicks, and how the Australian Govt was quite happy to accept that).

Anyhoo, rant, rant, rant.

You’ve inspired me to write to my MP and a few others about our internet filter idea down here – at least the Opposition doesn’t have a policy yet, so they might be open to influence, unlike the in-power Labor party who refuse to consider any alternatives or even tweaking feedback after they announce a policy.

There’s an elephant in the room, mate, or is it an 800lb gorilla.

Thanks for clarifying the timescales around the founding of ORG though!

From a personal perspective, I think any change in focus you’ve perceived around ORG’s activities will have more to do with timing than with who’s the ED of ORG. When a bill is going through Parliament, then getting constituents to write to their MP is a good strategy. So, when the term extension Bill was going through the European Parliament, ORG asked its supporters to email their MEPs with concerns. But outside of a legislative cycle like this, ORG will be involved in all sorts of other activities to promote digital rights among legislators.

From my time at ORG, I can’t remember any “secret handshakey lunches”. What I do remember is being invited to endless policy roundtables where I was usually the only person not representing industry in some form or another. One incident remains uppermost in my mind. The topic was child internet safety, and I found myself around the table with every major social networking platform you can think of, and various other web service providers and industry bigwigs. One of these representatives actually raised my presence there as an issue – could they speak freely knowing that a “blogger” (they meant me) was in the room? I was appalled. But that’s how government policy was – and probably still is – getting made. Industry and government working together to sort things out in their own interests.

It’s unfortunate, but we must continue to remind politicians that they are employed to work in the interests of citizens. Outside of the legislative cycle, it was enough for me to say “guess what, guys, I get paid to be at this briefing because 1,000 (more now, of course) UK citizens thought it was worth their while to stump up £5 a month to get a citizen-orientated voice inside the policy-making process.” At crucial times like the passing of the DEBill, more is needed, and that’s when ORG asks its supporters to act.

I agree that endless requests to email your MP can get dull. Other interventions are possible (ORG’s volunteer e-voting and e-counting election monitoring campaign, for example, or our “freedom not fear” protest in Parliament Square). I went to the DEB Protest, and apart from anything else, it was a hell of a lot of fun.

I would counsel those who are disappointed with the DEBill outcome not to lose heart. In fact, if you take into consideration the democratic sleight of hand the Labour frontbench had to pull to pass the bloody thing, you might reconsider how effective mass campaigns of the sort launched against the bill actually are. Wash-up simply isn’t the place for a law like the DEBill. It was put their deliberately to insulate it from the organised and vocal public outcry the frontbench knew it would incite. They can’t do that every time. They can’t run from us forever, and we’re getting stronger every day.

• Conservatives would have their own form of the Bill, but they claim it would be less draconian.

And do any of the parties have a good position on the Act? Not as far as I can tell.

Why? What leverage do the BPI have that the ORG do not? Sure, the record companies can say: we will stop selling records in the UK. That will cost N jobs and X damage to the British economy. At that point, are they realistically representative of their community? Do you think that artists would be comfortable with that?

As a founder member of ORG, but not involved in its operation, I perceive a change in its focus. It used to be a lobbying organisation – Becky Hogge would talk in interviews about their lawyers and lobbyists meeting with MPs, MEPs and the like. There were requests to contact MPs directly, but the focus seemed to be on the “behind the scenes” stuff. That seems to have shifted over the last year, with the campaigning side of ORG growing.

The shift from being a lobbying organisation to a campaigning organisation is a bit disconcerting, for me at least. I was happy paying my £5 per month and letting ORG look after my digital rights. Maybe the scale of the problem has changed, but ORG helped defeat software patents in Europe, so I don’t think it can have done.

I hope that the Digital Economy Bill has switched on this community to the problem of politics and technology. It was clear from the comments on twitter during the debates that we are politically very niave, about what can be expected from MPs and how the political process worked. (Would a debate with all 600+ MPs present have had any real discursive merit or made any difference? I don’t think so.)

If every LibDem MP had been present and voted against the Bill, it would have been a tied vote. Except it wouldn’t. The Labour whips would have just made another 100 Labour MPs stay in Westminster to be shepherd through the lobbies when the time came for a vote. Realistically this Bill was always going to pass, the best we could have hoped for would be a delay to the next parliamentary session. Haranguing MPs for not showing up is cathartic but ultimately fruitless.

There are I suggest three problems for those who oppose the Digital Economy Act: 1) The provisions of the act 2) The parliamentary process which allows major legislation to be rushed through with only a few hours debate 3) The Labour majority in the commons

If the Digital Economy Act has been an eye-opening experience for you, then I suggest you consider the positions of all the parties on the Act and on parliamentary reform when it comes to vote in the election.

As for the ORG I’m sorry to disappoint you but rallying supporters is about the only leverage they have. So if you expect somebody to fight for your rights on your behalf without bothering you then no, that’s never going to happen. I mean if your thinking about elected representatives would work then the politicians should fill that role… but they don’t.. well not all the time at least.

oh and btw.. DEBill means crazy in romanian

I got word back from a few offices about their views about patents and other tech policy and in Ireland most parties dont have any policies in this area.