Constitution
of the
Florida Pirate Party
Preamble
We are the Florida Pirate Party. We are the people. We are
originators. We are innovators. We are consumers. Best of all, we are voters.
We have been labeled Pirates because our opposition claims that
anyone who uses anything created by another person, without payment to that
person or their designated representatives, is in violation of copyright.
Therefore, according to this ridiculous standard, we are Pirates because we
speak and use language which was not created by us. We refute their principles
of operation as having no basis in logic or reason, excepting to secure their
financial interest at the expense of guaranteed popular rights. Such principles
erode any attempts at creating a culture in which the free flow of ideas can be
expressed and expanded upon without prosecution, persecution, intimidation or
censorship. Because we disagree with these principles on their face, and
because we consider the reasoning behind them flawed, we can thus be considered
nothing other than Pirates.
We are Pirates because we act in a way that effectively
counters the assumed right of security in exchange for the guaranteed rights of
our civil populace. We are Pirates because we care about the values of freedom
and innovation, which must be protected for posterity. We are Pirates because
we dare to claim that the interests of innovation are not well served by the
current model of commercial enterprise. We accept the label of “Pirate” as a
badge of honor, to be used in defense of freedoms everywhere.
We are Pirates, and this is our party. We are the champions
of liberty. We are considered illegitimate thieves by those who openly take
that which is not rightfully theirs. Action is necessary, and we are prepared
to now act. A more perfect time to act will not pass again. Here we assemble
under one banner, to defend our civil liberties which are gravely threatened.
Our banner is black, but our aims are red, white, and blue.
The Florida Pirate Party is hereby
organized for the general purposes of electing qualified persons to office and
determining public issues under the democratic processes of the United States.
Title 1: General
Principles & Resolve
Article 1: Democratic
Supremacy
We believe in the principles of democracy: we uphold the
right to democratic processes at all levels. We reject the notion that people
are incapable of governing themselves; if this was true, democracy would not be
possible. Democracy shall prevail for so long as the minds of people remain
free. It is therefore the duty of government to ensure democratic ideals.
We shall operate in all ways and in all activities with
democratic principles in mind.
We are resolved to utilize a veto consensus method in all
administrative dealings, as well as with all issues brought to the membership
to resolve, within reason and practicality.
Article 2: Innovation,
Progress and Freedom
We support the right to innovate, as protected by the United
States Constitution and the First Amendment. We respect and support the
Constitutionally enumerated obligation for Congress to "promote the
progress of science and useful arts" in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8. We
also hold that our Founding Fathers knew how to best motivate people, and we
work toward maintaining this standard once we achieve it again. We shall forge
new ideas for new kinds of business. We are opposed to any attempt at
censorship, monopoly or intimidation. Government has a responsibility to foster
both competition and open markets while protecting individual rights, but not
as less important than those of any organizations or corporations.
We are resolved to do all within our power to preserve the
right of innovation, promote progress, and thereby ensure the absolute and
undeniable freedom of our population.
Article 3: Governmental
Transparency and Privacy
We respect individual privacy, while at the same time
demanding all matters of state be open to the public. A government which treats
its people like criminals will breed criminals. Likewise, a government which
promotes respect of individuals will breed respect. People will do what is
expected, provided it is understand what expectations have been set. Thus,
government must trust the governed if it is to succeed in the new society.
All people deserve the right to privacy in their personal
affairs. All people deserve dignity. We are guaranteed to be free from
interference in our personal effects, papers, and private lives by the Fourth
Amendment to our nation's Constitution. The Fourth Amendment does not specify
that such protection is limited only to government. We therefore uphold that
privacy in one's communication, one's home, and one's private life where there
should be an expectation of privacy is inalienable. We decry any attempts to
monitor communications by announcing that privacy is suspended, because an
expectation of privacy must be preserved in all communications for democracy to
exist. It is thus counter to our nation's Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to
permit warrant-less wiretapping, since the implied right to security does not
exceed the expressed right to be private from governmental interference.
All people deserve to be well-informed and involved with
their respective governments. The ideal of democracy must be upheld by the
people if it is to survive; and this cannot happen if the government is closed
to the public or interferes with the private lives of its citizens. Such
interference can also be achieved by failure to safeguard the right to privacy.
Privacy is necessary to our society's smooth function. Transparency is the only
means by which government can ensure the popular support and involvement in
governmental processes. And in the emergent global society, this involvement is
critical to the maintenance of our own sovereignty and the timely action of our
government.
We are resolved to promote transparent operation within
government wherever possible, and to demand privacy for individual citizens in
all things. We further resolve to fight warrant-less wiretapping on the grounds
that such is indeed Unconstitutional and directly counter to the aims of our
Founding Fathers.
Article 4: Copyrights,
Patents, and Trademarks
Copyright law has enjoyed the concept of Fair Use for
decades. We uphold fair use as a defense for civil litigation against copyright
infringement, as we believe that the large corporations, though operating
legally, violate the spirit of the law when they sue unwitting individuals who
simply want to enjoy media in the privacy of their own homes. Invasion of
privacy demands a response. Even if a government is not the one responsible,
it's still wrong. We view the practice of violating citizens' privacy as
exploitative, even if it is to protect copyright.
Fair use is not infringing use. We will continue to promote
legal fair use in all ways possible, including public education, and we seek to
expand fair use, instead of limiting it as the current tendency appears to do.
Copyrights are fine. Using them to exploit people is not acceptable. We will fight
every battle it takes to prevent the exploitation of our nation's citizens.
We support artist rights: artists should be not only
correctly attributed, but also compensated. Artists are not compensated for
their contractually-enforced compliance to large corporate interests once they
sell their copyrights, and we believe that more of the attribution (and
resulting royalties) should go to the artists than to those who are producing
works that the population is no longer interested in. In addition, copyright is
being subverted to erode civil liberties, and as such we find an obligation to
eradicate the portions that permit such erosion.
We consider the right of use with correct attribution
sufficient where the original works may not be recognizable, or where their use
is insignificant to the whole of the work, including (but not limited to)
sampling and remixing of original works to create new works. We uphold the
right to use and distribute derivative works, provided correct attribution is
maintained.
Patents, which are commonly abused and used to prevent
progress and innovation, should be far more limited than they are now. Much of
the value of patents come from the public disclosure of information enabling
others to reproduce the invention. We believe that if no patents existed, it
would be to the detriment of progress and innovation; however, we also do not
recognize an unchallengeable claim that a patent should be retained if no
progress is made in its development.
Trademarks are commonly abused. A trademark should not also
have a copyright. In addition, a trademark's use should be allowable in satire,
parody, and humor; for so long as no association to the trademark holder is
implied, and correct attribution is given, there should be no issue with its
use, even by competitors. A trademark should be used for branding, and for
identification of a company. While these uses should be protected, they are
not; and other uses are protected which should not be.
We resolve to reform laws to promote innovation, progress,
and thereby ensure freedom. It is only a productive society which can ensure
it's own freedom.
Article 5: Due Process,
Self-Incrimination, and Freedom of
Association
Due Process of Law is required in a free and democratic
society and guaranteed by the Fourth and Sixth Amendments. For this reason, we
resolve to uphold due process of law, even when contrary to our own stated
interests. This does not imply that we agree with all laws, but the process of
law must be upheld throughout until either we are victorious or no further
changes are possible.
Our country's Constitutional Fifth Amendment gives freedom
from self-incrimination. While the interests of justice and freedom require
truth, no individual should ever be compelled to testify against themselves,
nor by failing to testify against themselves implied to have admitted guilt by
omission. We are against the practice of compelling people to incriminate
themselves, and we view it as an abuse of justice. Many times, what someone is
hiding is not their own guilt, but rather their associations to others. Such
associations, where productive, should never imply complicity or agreement to
an individual's motives.
We also have the freedom to associate and gather for any
reason we feel is appropriate, as long as we're not advocating or engaging in
violence, as guaranteed by the First Amendment. We believe in democratic
processes, and gathering to show support for or opposition of any policy is an
informal request for a redress of grievances. These are protected rights and
were made so by the Founding Fathers of our nation.
Our freedom of association is important and fundamental; and
thus, by remaining silent, we should not feel compelled to either commit
perjury or incriminate ourselves. If we are penalized for remaining silent,
such penalties currently imply that we have admitted guilt. Implication of
guilt being different from an assurance of guilt, such evidence should never be
submitted to any court where it shows that a person was compelled to admit
guilt when it was not indeed admitted.
We resolve to advocate due process of law; to discover,
ensure, and remove all end-runs around true justice; and to uphold that a
person's association with a group does not imply inclusion in, acceptance of,
or support for their ideals and goals.
Article 6: Minorities,
Prejudice, & Foreign Sovereignty
Minorities are not recognized. We are all human. Prejudice
simply makes no sense, where matters of
predetermination are concerned. We recognize that there are
differences in skin color, bone structure, belief, thought, attitude, and
values. These differences are desirable and important to a free society.
Therefore, such differences should be embraced rather than used as a means of
separation or limitation. We have no room for prejudgment.
As such, the only limitations for any office within our
party is the ability to do the job, and to be either a voting citizen of our
nation, or to be of legal resident-alien status and to be working on attaining
citizenship status.
We also recognize that those who hail from foreign nations
deserve the benefit of education regarding our system of government and how it
works, as well as addressing any perceived shortcomings therein. However, if
they do not want such education, we should not force their acceptance of it.
Even if a government requests assistance, it should be the voice of the people
which is heard, rather than the voice of the governing body. This is the
upholding of democratic principle and operation by consensus.
Foreign nations likewise should not be forced to enforce our
laws; nor should we theirs. All nations deserve to conduct their own internal
affairs as sovereign. While we can criticize and admonish, democratic
principles demand that we allow other governments to operate in the manner they
see fit, even if we do not agree with their methods, ideology, or definitions.
They have the right to kill and enslave their citizens, but they do not have
the right to do the same to ours. Likewise, we should not force democratic
ideals upon them. We should uphold the right of sovereignty even in our own
lands. The principles of democracy should convey to the people the necessity of
action, and leave the choice of action to the people.
This guarantee of foreign sovereignty does not imply that we
should support tyrants. Our nation cannot and should not support or continue to
permit tyranny in any form. When a nation that we trade with kills or enslaves
its citizens, our nation has a right to speak against such things. We also have
a right to cease trade. We must be willing to accept the risks associated with
maintaining high ideals and yet not forcing those ideals on others. Even with
the cessation of trade, however, we must support democratic processes and continue
to encourage democratic ideals, even while we cease trade with those who would
enslave or oppress their populations. We must be willing to inconvenience
ourselves to uphold our principles, or they are not principles at all, and
merely words which convey a nice idea.
We must also maintain our own sovereignty. Foreign nations
have no right to impede or intrude upon our sovereign status; likewise, we have
no rights where foreign nations are concerned. To try to control foreign
countries is to invite the ire of others. Our nation does not need or deserve
the ire of others. We should therefore support sovereignty of all countries
while encouraging democratic ideals, without direct interference in the
operation of sovereign nations or their systems of government. If our system is
superior, people will naturally see that it is so and adopt it; if otherwise, a
better system will surely come into place. We resolve to help our country
understand that foreign powers should remain sovereign in all things, even where
we disagree. Exceptions to this include the necessity of violent resolution,
should our nation be attacked, for so long as just action can be maintained.
Article 7: File Sharing,
Distribution, Consumer Rights, and
Originator Rights
There is no crime in sharing files, nor should there be. The
crime comes when those who created the content of these files are unpaid. We do
not aim to legitimize theft; we aim to help create a business model that
incorporates free distribution.
Those who share music should pay the artists directly. No
middle-man is necessary, as no fee is needed for distribution. We therefore do
not recognize the legitimacy of groups like the RIAA, IFPI, and similar
organizations whose main purpose, in their current incarnation, is to protect
corporate interests above those of the artists and the consumers. We reject all
claims made of benefit to the artist and the upholding of artists' rights until
such time that either their practices significantly alter to permit such
benefit, or such benefit becomes plain for all to see. So long as industry
organizations of any kind continue to exploit either consumers or the
originators of the products such organizations (or their members) produce, our
purpose in the defense of democratic principles is compounded.
Those who share movies should pay the producer(s) of the
film, not the distributors. Again, distribution should be free. There is
already sufficient capital exchange that occurs in the production and theater
showing of any film; there is no need to burden consumers by requiring their
further purchase of media where no purchase should be needed.
Those who share software should pay only if that software is
useful to them, and then only what that software is worth to them. Programmers
should be the ones paid; not distribution companies. Specifically, game
designers should have the same status as rock stars in our society, because
what they do excites us just as much. Large distribution companies should not
be necessary in a system built around our modern infrastructure, particularly
when such infrastructure virtually eliminates the need for physical media. The
challenge, then, becomes one of convincing users that a particular game is
worth paying for. Profits increase and price decreases at the same time. It
benefits the programmers when a game is sold; but if people are unwilling to
buy, then the game's value to the population decreases. Simple economics are no
longer possible when a company seeks to hide its resources behind one
distributor.
Market-savvy consumers are no longer loyal to branding, but
to the originating studios--and thence, to the programming team itself. If a
team is unsuccessful at amalgamation but they produce a perfect product, then
amalgamation is not necessary. Likewise, if consumers are best served by the
presence of a given form of entertainment and can obtain it for free, they
should obtain it for free and only pay what they believe it is worth. The
enjoyment of gaming is found in the challenge to win, not in the winning
itself. Excluding people on the basis of ability to pay means excluding
potential talent.
We intend to work toward the establishment and maintenance
of a profitable business model in all aspects of distributed-media industry, a
model which does not exploit artists or require the originators of works to
sign away their rights to their innovative works. We want to help a flailing
industry to realize the errors of its ways in a new and market-savvy society,
because the old ways no longer work. We reject the idea that in order to
profit, one must exploit others or force them to our will.
We do not accept that there is anything inherently wrong
with file sharing. It is our wish to create a climate in which the free
exchange of cultural ideals can occur. We do not accept that entertainment
should be our top priority in life , nor do we agree that any one person,
group, or industry (short of humanity itself) can own the rights to any
culture, nor to the product thereof.
We have a business model to base things from. It's a matter
of risking the loss of control that those of industrial thinking believe is
necessary to profit. Many companies have proved that it's completely
unnecessary to continue the old methods of market domination. The best company
in the world is the one which is best able to adapt to the changing needs of
society; not one which seeks to override these needs with an outdated business
model.
We must find a means to work within the system, but so must
those who oppose us. The stakes are high, and one entire industry's existence
hangs in the balance. It is time they listened instead of making demands. We
resolve to educate the public about lawful uses of file-sharing, its beneficial
purposes, and why it should become legal to share all manner of files.
Article 8: Unpopular
Beliefs, Free Speech, and Network Neutrality
For millennia, unpopular beliefs were held to be criminal.
The adherents of many ideas now widely accepted were persecuted for hundreds of
years before finally finding acceptance. Endless persecutions still exist for
new ideas. We are willing to allow unpopular beliefs because it is only when
unpopular beliefs are permitted that we are also permitted to hold our own
unpopular beliefs.
We uphold the right to be unpopular. Where there is a
difference of opinion, people should be at least willing to listen. The less
people are willing to listen to things they personally find distasteful, the
less those who express such things will be able to learn.
Likewise, we are against others determining our desires and
shaping our apparent will against our wishes. Free speech demands that computer
networks likewise remain open and free from the interference of others. The
right of the people to be free from governmental infringement upon our communications
is guaranteed in our nation's First Amendment to the Constitution. However,
commercial interference must also be protected against. While we are not
opposed to the use of self-regulating "smart" networks, we are
opposed to the use of such for the purposes of profitability, and we are
likewise opposed with regard to human-managed networking apparatus because of
the high potential for abuse. Self-regulating networks are neutral, as the
rules regarding their operation are unchanged. We therefore support network
neutrality, rather than any kind of "equal" network. A neutral
network is required for democracy to prevail.
We resolve to uphold the right of free speech, because even
if we disagree with the message, the right to speak and be heard should be
upheld in all cases. This includes the right to express unpopular beliefs in a
rational manner, as well as the right to be free from interference with our
expression by the unscrupulous.
Article 9: Acting Within
the Law & Civil Liberties
We do not promote, advocate, support, or engage in illegal
activities. Where there is a disparity between individual action and the law,
the law wins. However, if the law is incorrect, based on incorrect or invalid
principles, or created because of political pressures rather than because it's
right, we hold that these laws should be changed. Changing a law does not
require civil disobedience.
We uphold the civil liberties of all peoples. Freedom to
innovate is at all levels the right of the people. It benefits government when
the people innovate, because governmental interests in the promotion of
progress and the upholding of popular rights is based in the ability to express
new ideas.
We reject the notion that civil liberties must be sacrificed
in order to maintain order or to serve justice.
We resolve to further civil liberties in our own country
through education and public service.
Article 10: Voting, Voting
Rights, and Taxation
All citizens are entitled to participate in their
government. We will promote the right to vote for all citizens, regardless of
legal status. Our Declaration of Independence explains that taxation without
representation under the law was abhorrent to our founding fathers. We hold
this to be a timeless truth, and so if any portion should be disallowed voting
rights, the same should be entitled to be free from taxation.
This includes unpopular segments of society, such as
criminals, as well as more popular segments, and members of our elected
government.
Our candidates are free to support or oppose the Electoral
College system, as this system has not been shown to either uphold or denigrate
democratic principles, the values of a free society, or anything that opposes
these. However, we do recognize that this system is in need of reform. In a
well-regulated democratic society with open communications, representative
voting is no longer necessary, as our infrastructure is capable of clearly
indicating the will of the people.
Gerrymandering circumvents the reason for having free and
open elections in a democracy. Though
gerrymandering is common practice in our country, we are
opposed to it, and would seek to establish a
nonpartisan committee to review and establish boundaries for
each Congressional district based on both
predetermined and more current fair criteria, where voting
is concerned. We would also seek to establish new criteria by Constitutional
Amendment, if necessary to secure a nonpartisan method of dividing
Congressional districts. If such is not necessary, we would see no need to
continue working toward it.
We resolve to uphold the right of truly universal suffrage
among our citizens. What the population demands, it should receive, even if
against the wishes of a governing body. As such, we also resolve to ensure
democratic processes at all levels of our operation.
Article 11: Freedom,
Societal Advancement, and Being a Pirate
A free society recognizes that freedom comes at a price.
This price is responsibility to the government.
Government and the governed should be an equal, symbiotic,
and interdependent relationship, whereby the government provides what the
people demand, and the people provide the needs of government in return. Where
one has more control over the other, there can be no stability or balance in
the long term.
We understand that society is advancing into a new era of
thought, and this era is marked by extended
opportunities and competitive generosity. Beginning with
several thousand consumers, it has become several hundred companies, and this
movement is growing not only in scope, but also in magnitude.
We recognize that in order for society to advance, there
must be an appreciation of values. The advent of the internet in the average
person's life universally causes social change, and this is a global change
that cannot be legislated against. We support this transition into a new
society, with new values and new ideas. Our aim is to promote this change, and
to assist those who have difficulty with it.
We also see that others label us Pirates because we disagree
with them (regardless of whether or not we actually engage in piracy, we are so
labeled because of our opposition to their ideals). We are told that any time
one uses something that doesn't belong to them, that one is engaging in infringement,
and therefore piracy. Because we all use language (which doesn't belong to us),
we are infringing on those who created it. Because we don't pay a royalty, we
are all Pirates.
We resolve to continue using the name "Pirate" for
our political party, in the name of freedom and social progress.
Article 12: Amendments
Amendments to this Constitution shall be heard by the
Executive Committee of the Pirate Party using a participatory consensus system.
Amendments must be announced and held for study for at least two meetings,
prior to being adopted. Amendments may not be given for temporary issues;
instead, temporary emergency orders may be given, which may not exceed 6 months
without a consensus vote. Temporary emergency orders must be voted on at the
next regular meeting of the Pirate Party, or as soon as is feasible. Emergency
measures must be voted upon by all non-officers at the meeting, and must pass
with a two-thirds approval or higher to be upheld. Emergency measures do not
count as amendments to this document, and must be voted upon every meeting
until either adopted as an amendment or discontinued. At any meeting where
two-thirds or more of those assembled should not uphold the measure, it should
be discontinued or the same shall be cause for a vote of no
confidence in the instigating officer.
Amendments to this Constitution must be unanimously upheld
by all members voting in a popular vote. Those who abstain should not be
counted as opposing or supporting. Those who oppose may have opportunity to
address specific concerns. These concerns must be either upheld and
incorporated, or logical reason given for refusal to uphold. A recall vote may
be held only four times before an amendment must be resubmitted.
Any vote which exceeds 95% shall be considered passed by
consensus, and may be considered unanimous if all objections have been
addressed already, if the dissenting votes are dissenting because of continued
objection to an item which has already been addressed to its exhaustion, rather
than simple opposition to the entire amendment.
Those who abstain may outnumber voters. This is expected and
acceptable for a consensus system.
