I was reading an article in the Guardian, that was inspired some of the #wikileaks documents relating to the murder of Pat Finucane, a solicitor in Northern Ireland. He came from a Republican family and acted for Republican defendants in the Northern Irish courts. This happened in 1972 and a lot of time has passed. Lord Justice Stevens looked into the events surrounding the death due to the persistent allegations that UK security forces were involved in the murder and he said among several things in 2003,
“The failure to keep records or the existence of contradictory accounts can often be perceived as evidence of concealment or malpractice. It limits the opportunity to rebut serious allegations. The absence of accountability allows the acts or omissions of individuals to go undetected. The withholding of information impedes the prevention of crime and the arrest of suspects.”
This is a lesson we can all learn. It is possible to prove (judicial) innocence in all walks of life, if you prepare for it. …
For some reason, I had a quick peek a the US Constitution earlier today, I wonder if Congress’s powers,
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
would permit nationalisation? What gobsmacked me though is that artists, authors and inventors copyright protection is a constitutional right. The constitution grants congress the right, or maybe duty,
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Mind you, I don’t see where it says that companies have the right to buy the copyright and pursue the author, artist and inventors customers. In fact, the consitution states that these rights should accrue to the authors and inventors, not their agents. Perhaps the current legal framework is unconstitutional.
ooOOOoo
Several people are exploring in the US, the limits of useful Arts, in particular looking to see if Porn films can be considered ‘useful arts’? DFL 12 Aug 2103 …
So we have a new government, I have been fearing a repeat of 1979, but I think some important things are different. I was taken with this article at Though Cowards Flinch and quoted at Socialist Unity and Lenin’s Tomb in an article called Labourism and the working class, which together with some of the results suggests to me that Labour may have found its heart (or stomach, if you prefer). They suggest found its soul, I think that’s a bit optimistic. Although the Liberal Democrats decision to join the Tory led coalition will not be forgotten by those who expected something different. Labour now needs to turn its back on neo-liberalism and find a way of posing a social democratic vision against those of the CONservative/Liberal DEMocrat coalition. It may even have found the confidence to find its way to truly oppose this government.
I may of course be badly let down by the Labour Party’s leadership election, I can’t see anyone that wants to take us there throwing their hat into the ring. The real problem is that Blair gutted the Labour Party’s internal democracy, so while they’re all busy thanking the foot soldiers or a magnificant campaign I am unsure if they know how to listen to us in the next few months.
I look forward to meeting and making new friends; I am one of those that came home to Labour last week. …
It’s been an exciting couple of days in British Politics. One interesting fact that I was pointed at by Paddy Ashdown on the Radio this morning is that of the 12 Prime Ministers since the 2nd World War, only 6 came to office by winning an election. i.e. Only 50% of post war Prime Ministers came to office by winning an election.
How
1940’s
1950’s
1960’s
1970’s
1980/90’s
Post 1997
General Election
Attlee
Churchill
Wilson
Heath
Thatcher
Blair
Between Election
Eden & MacMillan
Dougas Home
Callaghan
Major
Brown
The table above doesn’t show Wilson’s second administration. Also Ashdown says that it was five who became Prime Ministers on the basis of the ability to command a majority in the House of Commons, rather than on the back of a general election, so I may have made a mistake. I used Wikipedia’s British General Elections page as my source. …
I don’t need Ed Balls and Peter Hain to tell me how to decide to vote tactically, and I don’t need Tony Blair to tell me to vote for the party I believe in. I have never before voted for the winning candidate in a general election; I have just lived in Tory areas. I was quite excited when I voted in Camden but since that was 1982, (I think), I still didn’t vote for the winner. This year, I hope I will since I plan to vote to return Joan Ruddock to represent Lewisham Deptford.
In the viral video,where, Cameron sings “Common People”,
the penultimate image is the statement,
It’s been a while since they were in power.
But there’s a reason for that.
They fucked the country before.
Don’t let them do it again.
Too true, I rember the ’80s. Some people are trying to suggest that it’s not enough to oppose the Tories, unfortunately for them it’s my vote and I remember the mess they left the country in. They are still only looking to serve the interests of a minority, so they’ll have to try and do so with out my vote. Gordon Brown, once released from the straight jacket of Sky’s Leader’s debate, spoke from his heart at Citizens UK,
and reminded me, and many of us, the reasons we have always supported Labour and are on the left of the political spectrum. Gary Younge, in the Guardian’s “Comment is Free”, reinforces this in an article called I hate Tories. And Yes, it’s tribal.
I’d also like to thank those Labour MP’s and councillors I have spoken to over the last six weeks reminding me that in the Labour Party, I meet people who will work with me to build a better society.
In order to be able to vote in Deptford I have left Hampshire East where there has been a boundary change, which means that my house has moved from an impregnable Tory seat, into a more marginal Tory/Lib Dem constituency. The Guardian writes it up on their web site here…, and there’s a largish Labour vote to squeeze. I am not a huge fan of Adam Carew, the LibDem candidate, but I know what I’d do if I was voting there. The Tory can be beaten here.
The Daily Mirror has published a guide on how to vote for those of us to whom stopping the Tories is our main priority. It is mine.
However, I have been drawn back into a small level of political activism through the campaign to stop the Digital Economy Bill. In my blog article, called “Get your own facts”, I argued that supporters of internet freedom should ask their candidates what they think and make up your own mind. ORG have offered you the chance to find out what your candidates think on digital freedom, their web page is currently at http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection. It’s crucial that you do. If the DE Bill is your priority, use the ORG tool to find out what your candidates think, although it’s probably a bit late now, or go and ask them. While some Lib Dems are arguing that their’s is the only party to offer repeal, it is my view that the 23 Labour MP’s who broke their whip to vote against the 3rd reading and the 20,000 campaigners have had an effect on the Labour Party who are beginning to listen, (like so many issues, a bit bloody late) and both the Green Party and the Pirate Party have better policies than the Lib Dems whose manifesto is actually silent. Find out what your candidates think, understand the electoral arithmetic in your constituency and cast your vote accordingly. But remember, it was the Labour rebels who were & remain the true friends of internet freedom. The Lib Dem frontbench at no time opposed technical measures and disconnection and is still talking about curtailing piracy.
If you want a hung parliament, it’s a similar process, understand your constituency electoral arithmetic, and vote either Liberal Democrat or Labour, which ever has the best chance of winning, unless you live in Brighton Pavilion, where voting for Caroline Lucas, the Green Party candidate may lead to the Greens getting their first ‘Westminster MP’. I feel that Parliament would benefit from having a Green Party presence, their best chance looks to be Brighton Pavilion, where their leader, Caroline Lucas is standing. If I lived there, I’d be really torn.
If you want a fair voting system, again understand the constituency electoral arithmetic, and vote either Liberal Democrat or Labour, which ever has the best chance of winning, unless you live in Brighton Pavilion, where you should consider voting Green. The Liberal Democrats want a proportional representation voting scheme, as occurs in most of Europe, Labour propose a new voting system to ensure every MP has the support of the majority of voters. There’s room for a compromise here, and as a Labour supporter, I want a truly fair voting system, if that means coalition governments from now on, then so be it….I have had enough of single party majorities, even my own. Some people, Ed Balls, thats you that is, argue that coalitions mean that politics occurs behind closed doors, all I can say is that one party government does the same. Many of the Labour Government’s worst mistakes were made inside committee rooms to which to few party members, supporters and voters were invited. I think multi-party government will put the compromises, and the points of contention in front of the people and deals will have to be in the open.
I bumped into Joan Ruddock, the Labour Party incumbent candidate for Lewisham Deptford last Tuesday, so of course I asked her about the DE Bill. She listened and was interested in my views and invited me to continue the conversation. Just goes to show, for those to whom this is important, you need to find out your candidates views. It may not be good enough to read the party manifestos or study their votes. I know of several MPs who didn’t vote on the 3rd reading but who clearly oppose it although I can’t say why they didn’t vote. There were 23 Labour MPs, 18 Lib Dems and 5 Tories who voted against the third reading. …
Just over a week ago, the Digital Economy Bill got its 3rd reading, and according to “Computing” got its Royal Assent on the 9th April. I watched the 2nd & 3rd reading debates on parliament.tv with Tweetdeck open. Others have commented on how helpful having crowd sourced commentary was, which I have to agree with and also how disappointed they were that most MPs weren’t in the chamber to hear the debate. Twitter certainly enhanced my understanding and enjoyment of the debates, which were rather spoiled at the end by the tiny vote in favour of the Lib Dem amendment and then against the 3rd reading. On the good side, I have been pleased to ‘meet’ some new twitter correspondents, however I had to turn it off at work for the rest of the week. Unlike contracted musicians with royalty based earnings, if I don’t work, I don’t get paid and I found it too distracting. …
Today’s copyright law in the US and the UK only serves the interests of a minority of participants in the creative industries and the knowledge economy. The debate in Britain about the Digital Economy Bill is actually trying to avoid confronting whether the UK and by implication the World’s intellectual property law framework is fit for the 21st Century. Jessica Litman at the University of Michigan’s Law School has published a paper called Real Copyright Reform, see the Abstract & Download, in which, among other things, she argues there are four roles, and its her paper that inspired my blog snip, Copyright Stake Holders, dated 30th March, and that copyright law needs to serve a balanced interest of all participants. (Interestingly she misses the interests of non participants). …
There are four interested parties in copyright law, authors, distributors, makers and users. Why is today’s copyright law only in one group’s interests?
Actually there are five, because the lawmakers are meant to hold the ring?
Why aren’t they doing this in the UK?
And why are authors identifying with the distributors? You need to change sides, the people you support aren’t your friends. …
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.