FC 2011-03-24 transcript

18:05 <+Zblewski> Okay. Should I try and start a semblance of order, then? 18:05 <~MikkelPaulson> order? 18:05 <+Zblewski> We're having a meeting, no? 18:06 <~MikkelPaulson> General Meeting is in 2h 18:06 <~MikkelPaulson> FC meeting starts... well, 6 minutes ago 18:06 <+Zblewski> shat, correct 18:08 <~MikkelPaulson> could you text/call Oren about the meeting tonight? 18:09 <+Zblewski> Sure 18:09 <~MikkelPaulson> I don't have Travis' number 18:09 <~MikkelPaulson> or Ric's 18:10 <+Zblewski> I Hav Travis's cell from before he moved 18:10 <+Zblewski> dunno if it's the same number 18:11 <+Zblewski> Actually, I have two numbers to try 18:11 <~MikkelPaulson> he has a number on his Facebook 18:11 <~MikkelPaulson> just texted that 18:12 <+Zblewski> 1 *** ***-****, as well as 1 *** *** **** 18:12 <~MikkelPaulson> well 206 is Seattle, 778 is Vancouver and environs 18:13 <+NuitariAtWork> I've got to go in about 40 minutes 18:13 <+NuitariAtWork> so let's get it started 18:13 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:13 <~MikkelPaulson> the purpose of the meeting is to give final approval to the platform document 18:14 <+NuitariAtWork> where can we see it? 18:14 <~MikkelPaulson> http://pr.piratepad.ca/50 18:15 <~MikkelPaulson> we're voting on section #1 18:15 <~MikkelPaulson> yes? 18:15 <~MikkelPaulson> or rather the members will be 18:17 <+NuitariAtWork> no patents at all on pharma? 18:17 <+NuitariAtWork> I get it for software, business methods and organisms 18:18 <+Zblewski> I'd agree to it. 18:18 <+Zblewski> It's chemicals. 18:19 <~MikkelPaulson> I think a 5-year patent across the board is reasonable 18:19 <~MikkelPaulson> even bad patents would expire quickly enough that they wouldn't be a                      significant concern 18:20 <+Zblewski> Organisms need to be unconditionally banned. 18:20 <+Zblewski> *patents ON organisms 18:20 <+NuitariAtWork> right 18:20 <+NuitariAtWork> and no creeping up the scope and getting another 5 year on a different patent 18:20 <+Zblewski> It's a relatively new concept anyways 18:20 <+NuitariAtWork> it must be a significant change 18:21 <~MikkelPaulson> can we remove section 4.2? 18:22 <~MikkelPaulson> as I noted, it's not a huge concern 18:22 <+Zblewski> Yes. 18:23 <+NuitariAtWork> meh keep it 18:23 <~MikkelPaulson> but FOI is already inexpensive, and as Baptista demonstrated, making it free isn't a good idea 18:24 <~MikkelPaulson> also, I moved CRTC into net neutrality, so I think we can get rid of 4.3 18:25 <+NuitariAtWork> FOI needs to be digital and cost free for the government 18:25 <~MikkelPaulson> better to introduce full transparency 18:26 <~MikkelPaulson> FOI is about as good as a system like that is going to get 18:26 <~MikkelPaulson> which is sorta like playing pin the tail on the donkey 18:26 <+NuitariAtWork> up to you guys, I don't really have an opinion 18:27 <+Zblewski> The thing is 18:27 <+Zblewski> I was able to meet a mate from the same cell block as Maher Arar in Syria, not long ago 18:28 <+Zblewski> He had been talking about the terrible process of trying to get information from the RCMP 18:28 <+Zblewski> painful, and you rarely get what you want, or are unable to publicly talk about the info 18:29 <+Zblewski> http://abdullahalmalki.ca/ 18:29 <~MikkelPaulson> does he have any ideas for how the process could be improved? 18:31 <+Zblewski> Make the process of releasing information completely transparent, by giving full access of documents to a subject, especially after being cleared of wrongdoing 18:32 <+Zblewski> That's one thing. 18:33 <+Zblewski> The problem with his case was that the claims against him were sourced from an                 outside document that never even mentioned him, ever 18:33 <+Zblewski> But I digress 18:34 <+NuitariAtWork> ok next point ? 18:34 <+Zblewski> I guess so. Mikkel? 18:34 <~MikkelPaulson> yeah, much as I'd like to include it, I don't know that it's concrete enough at this point 18:34 <~MikkelPaulson> so we're leaving FOI in there? 18:35 <+NuitariAtWork> yeah it's important to transparency 18:35 <+NuitariAtWork> even if we don't have much concrete 18:35 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:35 <~MikkelPaulson> lose 4.3, since it's duplicated in 3.1? 18:37 <+NuitariAtWork> sure 18:37 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:38 * Zblewski nods 18:38 <~MikkelPaulson> 5.1? 18:38 <~MikkelPaulson> the rest is just speculating 18:39 <+Zblewski> We need to have more concrete knowledge of the previous leg. in Canada (and Iceland) 18:40 <~MikkelPaulson> make that 6.1 18:40 <+NuitariAtWork> 5 is fine for me 18:40 <~MikkelPaulson> yeah, it's a bit vague 18:40 <~MikkelPaulson> but this version doesn't have to be absolutely concrete 18:41 <~MikkelPaulson> 6.1 (formerly 5.1) is a rewrite of 6.2, and 6.3 is chatting amongst ourselves 18:42 <+Zblewski> Well, .3 is not going in, durrhurr 18:43 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:43 <~MikkelPaulson> 7? 18:44 <+Zblewski> Hm 18:44 <+Zblewski> That section should go without saying 18:45 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:45 <~MikkelPaulson> running through this one more time 18:46 <~MikkelPaulson> vote to adopt section 1? 18:46 <~MikkelPaulson> yes 18:46 <+Zblewski> Yes 18:46 <~MikkelPaulson> NuitariAtWork? 18:47 <+NuitariAtWork> yes 18:47 <~MikkelPaulson> okay, passed 18:47 <~MikkelPaulson> shall we replace 2.1 with a straight 5-year patent with a higher standard of                      originality? 18:48 <+NuitariAtWork> yeah 18:48 <+Zblewski> I motion to add the outright elimination of gene patents 18:49 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:49 <+NuitariAtWork> ok 18:49 <+NuitariAtWork> same as organisms for me anyways 18:49 <+Zblewski> Anything which is or constitutes part of, a living organism 18:50 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:50 <~MikkelPaulson> and business models? 18:50 <+NuitariAtWork> should always be unpatentable 18:50 <+NuitariAtWork> same as software and algos 18:50 <~MikkelPaulson> I don't know what FOSS is doing under patent, to the best of my knowledge RMS talks about the effect of copyright terms on FOSS, not patents 18:51 <+Zblewski> Ah, yes 18:51 <+Zblewski> correct 18:51 <~MikkelPaulson> and I think where software is concerned a 10-year term would be more than enough 18:51 <~MikkelPaulson> and our present platform of legalizing personal sharing wouldn't have a                      significant effect on FOSS 18:51 <+NuitariAtWork> right 18:52 <+Zblewski> Yes 18:52 <~MikkelPaulson> okay, I move the adoption of section 2 18:52 <~MikkelPaulson> yes 18:52 <+Zblewski> yes 18:53 <~MikkelPaulson> any changes needed to section 3? 18:53 <~MikkelPaulson> I'm good with it as it is 18:54 <+NuitariAtWork> about privacy ? 18:54 <~MikkelPaulson> yeah 18:54 <~MikkelPaulson> NuitariAtWork: your vote on section 2? 18:55 <+NuitariAtWork> maybe add a program to educate businesses in the use of https for client authentication 18:55 <+Zblewski> Looks small, but it's fine. 18:55 <+NuitariAtWork> yes for both 18:55 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:55 <~MikkelPaulson> I vote yes to the adoption of section 3 as well 18:55 <~MikkelPaulson> section 4 18:55 <+Zblewski> I vote yes to section 3 18:55 <~MikkelPaulson> okay, passed 18:56 <+NuitariAtWork> for the CRTC 18:56 <+Zblewski> The Ottawa meeting expressed interest in S4 18:56 <+NuitariAtWork> add something about having consumer advocates be part of the board too 18:56 <+Zblewski> Thay don't like the idea of a democratically elected board, but approve of a panel of citizens appointing the board 18:57 <+Zblewski> *They 18:57 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 18:57 <~MikkelPaulson> could be appointed by Parliament as well 18:57 <+Zblewski> Yes, but that brings in a partisan risk 18:57 <~MikkelPaulson> maybe 18:58 <~MikkelPaulson> better than it is now 18:58 <~MikkelPaulson> any other changes to section 4? 18:58 <+Zblewski> If Harper sits in government long enough he can have an all-conservative leaning board 18:58 <~MikkelPaulson> he already does 19:00 <+NuitariAtWork> got to go 19:00 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 19:00 <+NuitariAtWork> rest looks fine to me as it is 19:00 <~MikkelPaulson> okay, so you vote yes to the rest? 19:00 <+NuitariAtWork> yes 19:00 <~MikkelPaulson> so recorded 19:01 <~MikkelPaulson> I move adoption of section 4 19:03 <~MikkelPaulson> Zblewski? 19:09 <~MikkelPaulson> *cough* Zblewski? 19:12 <+Zblewski> Yes 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> passed 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> I move adoption of section 5 19:12 <+Zblewski> Yes 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> and yes 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> passed 19:12 <~MikkelPaulson> I move adoption of section 6 19:13 <+Zblewski> Yes 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> yes 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> passed 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> and finally 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> the moment you've been waiting for 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> I move adoption of section 7 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> yes 19:13 <+Zblewski> Yes 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> passed 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> awesome 19:13 <~MikkelPaulson> we have a platform 19:14 <~MikkelPaulson> anything else or shall we adjourn? 19:14 <+Zblewski> Adjourn 19:15 <~MikkelPaulson> okay 19:15 <~MikkelPaulson> meeting adjourned