This wiki is closed and NOT maintained! The up-to-date PPI wiki can be found at


PPI Conference 2012/Saturday minutes

From pp International
Jump to: navigation, search

Minutes PPI GA 2012 Day 1 (Saturday)

10:00 start, Speeches by PPCZ

T. Schulz establishes that the necessary minimum quorum is met, establishes who the commentators are (they get approved), rules of preceding getting approved

question and debate on what to do with late membership applications, Sven (PPLU) and Thomas (PPCH) against altering of rules, Gregory Engels in favor. PPCA in favour of GA hearing late applicants anyway.

10:50 Presentation of pirate party Greece

11:17 Announcement - Court of Arbitration to decide on status of late applicants tomorrow.

11:20 Clarification that statute requirements, that new member applications be sent by the board to all members 2 weeks before the conference, were not met either.

11:20 presentation of PP Croatia They report they received acknowledgement of their registration just yesterday

11:29 presentation of PP Latvia

11:32 presentation of PP Slovakia

11:36 presentation of PP .ba pirate party isn't to do with the internet - but to do with freedom

11:45 presentation of PP Estonia speaker only, video not presented due to time constraints / technical issues Formed in 2009, inactive until recently

11:48 presentation of PP Tunisia Speaker was Secretary of state of Tunisia for 4 months

12:04 question from PPAU/PPNZ Video not working, explained via text sking about situation in Tunisia with 2 competing Pirate Parties Answer: both PPs made applications with Tunisian electoral authorities to register, but neither is registered. the one not present is anonymous, and aggrieved about the one that is present. Clarification (01:37 15/04) BOTH Tunisian PPs are registered, and compete with each other in elections. (Slim)

12:08 video presentation from PP Belarus

12:11 Statement via remote: PPCA: is not comfortable with the situation in Tunisia with 2 competing PPs, suggests they come back next year

12:12 Reaction: from someone of the french pp; met the group of Tunesia that is applying now; certifies that it is a proper pirate party; did not have any contact with the other pirate party of Tunisia.

12:14 Speech Amelia Andersdotter, member of European Parliament for Sweden

12:27 Statement via remote: PPCA: stands by position that PPCA will consider the Tunisian PP (the one not present) to have no interest in joining, if they have not contacted PPI by the 2013 conference

12:30 discussion about appointing people to take the minutes. (2 people - one to check). "padserver will shut down 14.00hrs for maintenance " minutes moved to PPCA Pad ( ) one of those appointed note takers: Sandb (Pieter Iserbyt, ppbe)

12:31 lunch break

13:30 Video working again;

  • test connection with Brendan, from PPAU. Carrying PPNZ's proxy too.
  • sound is not working for people on the streams

13:40 reconvened minutes moved back to (here)

Presentations of pirate parties applying for ppi membership (14:00)

Pirate Party of Berlin (13:39)

  • applied, but not in time
  • for observer membership
  • by Michael Hartung, representing PPDE-State of Berlin

Ukranian Pirates (13:42)

  • speaking in Czech, being translated to english
  • applied, but not in time
  • for ordinary membership
  • by Ivan Sirkov

Florida Pirate Party (13:45)

  • applied in time
  • for observer membership
  • by Jakub

Pirate Party of PPDE-State of Lower Saxony (13:47)

  • 2000 members, +20/day
  • applied in time
  • for observer membership

Pirate Party of Galicia (13:51)

  • applied, but not in time
  • for observer membership
  • by Muriel, from Pp Catalunia, because Pp of Galicia could not be here

Giving the word to our remote delegates (13:53)

  • when remote delegates are online on the screen: no live stream due to livestream
  • tech ops: technical problems resolved

Pirate Party Canada

  • by Travis
  • supporting candidacy of florida

Break (13:56)

  • due to absency of some required people

Voting block (14:46)


  • Represented by proxy
    • Australia,
    • New Zealand an
    • Canada;

Establishing quorum

  • Austria: not present
  • Australia: represented x
  • Belgium is present x
  • Brazil, not present
  • Bulgaria:not present
  • Canada: represented x
  • Czech: present x
  • Denmark, not present
  • Finland: not present
  • France: present x
  • Germany present x
  • Ireland not present x
  • Italy present x
  • Kazachstan not present??
  • Luxembourg: present x
  • Morocco: present x
  • Slovenia: not present
  • New Zealand: represented x
  • Portugal: present x
  • Romania: present x
  • Russia: present x
  • Serbia: present x
  • Spain: present x
  • Switzerland: present x
  • UK: present x

Quorum is 18 (72%). Is 1/3rd, Quorum is established.


  • tomorrow statutes amendments; affects some outcome, tomorrow, some votes will be done after amending the status
  • Accepted ordinary members get immediate voting rights
  • 4 applicates sent in time
    • Pirate Party of Greece (ordinary membership): 18 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain; accepted!
    • Pirate Party of Croatia (ordinary membership): 21 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain; accepted!
    • Pirate Party of Florida (observant membership): 21 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain; accepted!
    • Pirate Party of Lower Saxony (observant membership): 21 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain; accepted!

(how 21? when quorum was 18?)

Speech by Laurence Vandewalle (14:14)

Break (14:51)

  • For ten minutes
  • Note: each pp that was late in applying in either observant or ordinary membership can send one delegate to the court of arbitration

Pirate Party Europe/EU session (15.09)

Discussion about the Idea of a "European Pirate Party"

    • Do we need it or not?
    • How should it be set-up if so?

There is already:

First real blog post: why do we need a pp-eu? (btw pp-eu is a working name), next to PPI.

  • ppi is euro centric; not so accessible outisde of Europe; pp-eu would take some "euro" load of ppi making it more international
  • would allow us to organize on the pp-eu level better, esp. looking at 2014 elections
  • we can get funding from eu this way

Question round: is pp-eu a good or a bad idea?

  • as ppi or pp-eu
  • what about funding from europe
  • create a real european party for 2014
  • do we need a common political platform in the eu?
  • should it represent the pp ideals or represent the nations?
  • do we need a formal body?
  • what about after the elections; different MEP's require a lot fo coordination work; a goal of pp-eu should be to provide coordination work?
  • formal structure problematic for succesfull pp-eu?
  • two different structures; europe and european union?
  • having a common program? effects cooporation of MEPs later on?
  • less organisation and more action?
  • not a binding but more like an example common program?
  • not a european platform? issues are either world-wide or european union level?
  • not yet another structure? not about the structure but about our common goals?

Conclusion; Note:

  • reasoning including countries not part of eu, e.g. Norway:
    • they are affected by decision of the EU
    • they are part of schengen and pay money to the EU

Keynote address by Cory Doctorow (16.00)

  • pre-history of the pirate movement
  • 1999 and launch of napster
  • shutdown by court in 2001
  • shutdown did not start a revolution
  • napster was the last industry friendly filesharing system (auditable, etc)
  • new systems are much harder to track
  • money talks, bullshit walks: control over who listens less important than getting paid for it
  • artist want to get paid rather than decide who can listen or not
  • could be a model for ISP's / artists; if done right
  • doing it wrong are implementation details
  • doing it right could be good for pirates
  • what is the purpose of copyright?
  • copyright has always been made to favor the industry
  • succesfull copyright is one that allows for the widest possible amount of artist, to create the widest amounts of works, to be consumed by the widest possible audience
  • if we want to win the argument, we need to show that the industry is serving itself rather than the public
  • drm by the industry: to be able to charge for features that would be free if not drm'ed. e.g. restricting playback.
  • remixing, copying, sampling. analog sampling is legal. rap did not used to require licenses for samples; the industry has changed to rulings to be able to charge for this.
  • current rap: no more than 2 samples, because of the price
  • sampling requires artist to sign label contracts first
  • the game is long
  • copyright industry is just the first mini-boss, and we can beat it
  • 4 minutes of questions
  • license? >> text is part of a book that will be cc whenever it's out
  • industry moving further with locking down hardware; what should we do; make open source hardware? >>
    • nerd-fatalism: politics are shit so I don't participate
    • nerd-determinism: whatever law you make, i'll hack around it
    • both approaches are bad, law is stronger than tech. We need to stop this from happening now.
  • impact of 3d printers and trademarks; >> impact could be far larger


  • five minutes
  • till 17:00

Pirate Party Europe/EU session & Open Space Day 1 (cont.) (17.00)

more questions:

  • why to ask/do this on ppi ga when the decision seems to already have been made?
  • we should move forward; discussions already took too long; elections are getting nearer, should we not focus on output?

current preprations have been done via:

Current suggested program / proposal:

  • support, but minor questions on different parts by different people
  • decisions making is hard, if parties need to ask their members; e.g. translate in local languages?
  • e.g. German: boards are elected and can make such decisions?


  • e.g. posters, same colours, or and same style?

everyone is asked to participate in the pp-eu movement, work on the proposal, join in ...

point IV

  • does point IV need to go away? vote on it? as an opinion vote? (establishing a european party) -
    • what is a european party? like the greens in eu-parl? >> technically yes.

point V adaptations

  • changes have been proposed; decision on different versions later?

point IV

  • does it have meaning (support of MEPs)
  • does it constitute veto power of MEPs?

point III

  • only accept proposals supported by all pp?
  • is about bases of program, not program
  • is this a road to non-decision?

End of Day 1 (17.59)

13:15 TO DO remote delegates notes persons can follow the PPI conference via live stream at pirate-streaming.netinutes-PPIGA2014

TO DO at the end of saturday - discount on TAXI