[Patents] (Fwd) Re: The dready threat of Hague Convention

[critto@poczta.wp.pl (Krzysztof Sobolewski)]

From:                   PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
To:                     Krzysztof Sobolewski <critto@poczta.wp.pl>
Copies to:              <patents@liberte.aful.org>
Subject:                Re: [Patents] (Fwd) Re: The dready threat of Hague 
Convention
Date sent:              Sun, 19 Aug 2001 14:26:10 +0200 (CEST)

> > > Could you be kind and explain what should members of
> > > the list undertake?
> 
> Indeed the right question.

Surely it is. Probably, we should act similiarly as with the other 
matters. Create an anti-HC petition website. Moreover, INFORM 
the societies, human rights orgs. and political societies about the 
grave threat the 'speech-related' part of HC poses to them. The 
more publicity those matters will have, the better for us and our 
freedom of speech.

> > It would also become illegal for a programmer in Poland, Germany
> > or UK to write any program that breaks the US patent, despite the
> > fact, that sw patents are illegal in Europe.
> 
> This is a beginning of an answer.
> 
> There is already a case where a German programmer, prof. Dersch, was
> intimidated by a US patentee (ipix inc) to take free software from the
> net.  One of the reasons why Dersch backed down is that US court decisions
> are already executable in Germany and vice versa to some extent through
> mutual treaties.
> 
> It would be interesting to know how exactly the HC (hague convention) is
> supposed to modify or extend this kind of regulation.

It may be more evil than any US threats and lobbying efforts in 
Europe. It will literally allow USA to rape all the European laws 
which protect our programmers from the patent threat.

> The "Chinese dissidents" argument makes it very clear that there will
> necessarily be some limits in the system.  National law systems will be
> free to create some "public order" based exceptions.  However there will
> be a great pressure toward not creating them.

This is not about "some limits", Hartmut!! The WHOLE speech-
related PART has to be _removed_, if HC is to be in compliance 
with all the human rights conventions and national laws. What 
about UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948? 
What about European Convention of Human Rights? What about 
other UN and international conventions which protect the free 
speech and research against censorship and other persecution?

I don't think that Amnesty International would say that the rule 
requiring them to shut up about crimes against humanity (tortures, 
killings etc., performed by rulers and their minions) is the question 
of "some limits"; neither would say the Human Rights Watch, and 
other human rights defending-devoted organisations. Surely, they 
realize the threat. We should cooperate with them.

> There are quite a few issues for which a system like that of the HC can be
> helpful.  Among them are environmental issues, e.g. factories that blow
> polluted air across national borders.  Here again, individual countries
> may set limits to what can be executed, but the idea of accessing the
> perpetrators more quickly by court is not all that unattractive.

I know, I know. Sure there are some useful parts in it. That's why I 
compared it to the U.S. Telecommunications Reform Act from 
1996; most of it was helpful and liberatory towards the 
telecommunications. Only the Communications Decency Act part 
(it was a part of TRA) was anti-freedom and abolished (by proving 
its unconstitutionality) after the lobbying and educational 
campaigns performed by Electronic Frontier Foundation, Global 
Internet Liberty Campaign, American Civil Liberties Union, and 
others. 

> Also, your "tax haven" example is not very convincing to me.  I don't the
> "free market" as a guarantor of liberty.  It can have that function, but
> it can also merely be a pretext for all kinds of powerful private groups
> (Chomsky's "private tyrannies") to increase their power and further reduce
> the possibilities of regulating problems in a public sphere.

Okay, okay, we differ a bit in the matter of the world outlook. You 
don't must to agree with me in 100%, neither must I agree with you 
in 100%. There are some common ideas we share.

All I wanted to prove with 'tax haven' example was, that even the 
BIG international organisations MIGHT be forced to step back, and 
to give up their plans, if the interested, endangered parties will 
react. Whether they are 'tax havens' or human rights organizations, 
or hackers, or even some people we don't accept (eg. racist 
groups) is another matter. 

 
> All these considerations make the HC issue extremely complex, and what we
> need at the moment is indeed not a crusade but more detailed information.

Sure. First, we need to be well informed. We need to recognize the 
territory and the forces of the enemy. We must prepare to the 
combat first, and form the alliance with other organisations. 

Personally, I don't think that the speech-related part of HC will pass 
at all. It will probably share the fate of "cybercrime treaty"'s part 
devoted to combat the unprecised 'hate speech' -- USA _NEVER_ 
agreed to accept it, and it failed. 

There are more important things, however, than defending the hate-
mongers. Human rights activists, anti-communist dissidents from 
China and Cuba really DO NOT deserve to be subjected to tyranny 
outside their homelands. They are REFUGEES, and should be 
treaded as such. Broadcasting media like Radio Free Asia (or 
Polish medium, Radio Racja, targeted to provide Belarussians with 
the accurate and true news) should be free to operate. 

And thus, if spreading hate message is unlikely to be prohibited, 
neither should be the humane, pro-freedom speech. And thus, we 
WILL have the support from human rights organisations, and this 
part of HC WILL surely be removed.


Yours in Liberty,
     Krzysztof (Christopher) "Critto" Sobolewski

e-mail:critto@poczta.wp.pl, liberter@poczta.wp.pl
www:www.critto.prv.pl, www.libertaryzm.prv.pl
phone:301-72-50, 0608 114 421
address:ul. Krosna 32/2, 80-857 Gdansk, POLAND, EUROPE
<KILL "ECHELON"> militia anthrax fbi militia militia fbi anthrax delta force 
roswellwaco oklahoma city waco oklahoma city waco 
oklahoma city </KILL "ECHELON>
PS.1 "Proclaim liberty troughout the land unto all the 
      inhabitants thereof!"
YEAR 2001 -- ** YEAR OF FREDERIC BASTIAT ** www.bastiat.net