NationStates Jolt Archive

Here's something I whipped up to deal with the resolution that stares me in the face on the front page of the UN every time I look at it.

I wrote this repeal below. It's my first shot at writing official UN stuff, but I think it does the job. However, I am open to advice.

NOTE: Whilst I believe strongly in getting rid of Resolution #5, I do not have the endorsements necessary to propose this myself. If it looks like this repeal might have some support, I will need a delegate with more endorsements than I have to be my 'partner in crime' on this one, and actually propose the text themselves. (Not a bad deal - I do the writing and someone else gets their name on the repeal! :) )

Here is the repeal I have written. Feel free to post and let me know what you think.
_________________________________________________________________

UNDERSTANDING that DVD's are now, as they were at the time of the passage of UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal), an integral part of the entertainment industry for many cultures and nations worldwide, and

UNDERSTANDING that the writer and voters in favour of UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal) more than likely had the interests of these cultures and nations at heart at the time of the passing of this proposal,

The United Nations makes the following assertion:

RECOGNIZING that the intended definition of DVD's in UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal) are "DVD Videos", a form of movie-based entertainment,

REALIZING that region codes on DVD's allow movie and distribution companies to control certain aspects of the release of the films they produced, such as (but not necessarily including) content, release date and release price,

RECOGNIZING the right of these production companies to have the rights to control elements of a DVD's release, providing that they do not break national laws,

SYMPATHETIC to the point of view that DVD regional control is not an issue to be dealt with by the United Nations, and

BELEIVING that UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal) contains poor grammar and spelling, no argument to support the action that it takes against DVD regions, and generally reflects poorly upon the UN as a whole,

The United Nations moves to repeal UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal).

BELEIVING that UN Resolution #5 (DVD region removal) contains poor grammer and spelling,I'm sorry, but you lost me right off the bat with that one.

that startes me in the face http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif stares
everytime I look at it. http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif every time
Without further adieu http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif ado
an intrical part of entertainment http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif integral

... and last, but most certainly not least ...
contains poor grammer http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif grammar

If you're going to bitch about grammar and spelling, at least run your own proposal through a grammar and spell-checker first.

I'm sorry, but you lost me right off the bat with that one.

that startes me in the face http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif stares
everytime I look at it. http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif every time
Without further adieu http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif ado
an intrical part of entertainment http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif integral

... and last, but most certainly not least ...
contains poor grammer http://assets.jolt.co.uk/forums/images/icons/icon2.gif grammar

If you're going to bitch about grammar and spelling, at least run your own proposal through a grammar and spell-checker first.


Thank you for your post. As you can see, this is the sort of thing that I am asking for advice for. Those problems have now been fixed in the original post.

I apologise for not running it through the checker first, but I was on my way out and racing against the clock. I will attempt to be more careful in future, but your spell-check does illustrate the importance of this draft thread.

If anyone has any comments about the actual content of the repeal, feel free to post as well. This thing is a work in progress, so all contributions are welcome.

The spelling is debateable, as there are both English and American spellings of various words

The spelling is debateable, as there are both English and American spellings of various words
But there are not variations in the spelling of the words picked out. There is a large difference between the meanings of 'ado' and 'adieu', and grammar has been spelt with 'a's since Classical Greek.

RECOGNIZING the right of these production companies to have the rights to control elements of a DVD's release, providing that they do not break national laws,
You write »recognizing the right of these production companies« but, hey, keep in mind: We are talking about a »right«, that is not given by nature. It is a right that can be given by national laws, but there are good reasons for not giving a right to control DVD-resales in the regional code's shape to the companies:

The DVD regional control code is a monopolistic mean aiming at dividing the world into monopoly-controlled parts. This would be pro-trust-policy not policy for a free market.
A free market needs concurrence and the DVD regional code disables concurrence.

This would be a big disprofit for the people. The people should have the right to buy their DVDs where they want and to play them where they want!

And no, I don't think, the people should lose this right because the grammar of great resolution #5 might be non-perfect.

My nation will happily support a simple repeal on the basis that the original resolution is poorly drafted and a waste of UN time. We will not support any replacement.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

Its there, it serves its purpose, just leave it alone.

And no, I don't think, the people should lose this right because the grammar of great resolution #5 might be non-perfect.

There is more to it than grammar and spelling, although that is part of it.

I don't believe that this is a matter that needs to be addressed by the UN. And surely if it were to be addressed, more reasoning is required in the resolution as to why it needs to be dealt with as an issue by the United Nations.

Free trade and free markets seem to be something being encouraged by some. Why not let the market do what it wants with DVD's? Why is there this UN-approved resolution dealing with one format of distribution to one part of the entertainment industry?

Perhaps people can supply adequate answers to these questions. If nothing else, at least the issue is back up on the forums being discussed, which (in my opinion) is a good thing.

1) I think it's a good resolution to keep in place - or be replaced

2) My issue with DVD regions is that it limits one's ability to trade across borders, etc. OOC: My gf is right now struggling with this problem, TBH. She wants to buy a movie made by a Finnish group - who are pretty much working not-for-profit. They've been making movies in a similar manner for nearly 10 years and now are making a full 2 hour (approx) movie to be released later this year. The concern is that Finland is using Region 2. Canada uses region 1. I was talking to one girl who said she had similar troubles trying to import movies from China (still in Chinese). However, she has adapted to it by owning TWO DVD players - one which she manually set to Region 2.

Many claim that this is done to try and lower the issues of pirating, but if you check torrent sites and other file-sharing programs, you'll find that the pirating is still going on. It doesn't stop it, it just slows it very slightly. As technology advances, they'll probably (if they don't already) have programs running through the net that allow for you to watch either region without troubles. You'd have more success imbedding data on both the DVDs (that isn't readable by the computer, but the DVD can read it) coupled with an imbedded code within the program that if matched, will allow for the DVD to be read but otherwise will tell the computer the DVD is burnt (and if it's not on the DVD, well I wonder what we do now......) (end rant). Basically, I don't buy that argument.

If they had a single DVD region - with the way the world is becoming so interconnected, you could order DVDs of your movies online from another country in any language that they produce it in and have it shipped to you without concern of the DVD region. This will also benefit small companies who simply can't afford to invest in another burner just to help their following from another region.

3) Resolution 5 has an action statement, but no action plan. It has little argument and little explanation of what DVD regions are. It acts upon countries but looks like it acts upon nations. A MUCH better resolution can and should be made. Until that replacement exists in a draft form, I will not support any attempt to repeal.

Forgottenlands, you have made a very good and appreciated contribution to the issue of DVD region removal, and the repeal of this resolution.

You have made very good arguments, some of which I agree, others not. But the most important thing about your post from my eyes is that you have put forward an intelligent argument. That is what is needed about this issue - intelligent conversation that is willing to put forward arguments.

I believe that, at least for now, that there are 3 stands on this issue.

1) Nations that like the proposal the way it is,

2) Nations that like the basic idea of the proposal, but who believe the current resolution need to be repealed and then replaced

3) Nations that dislike the idea, and wish to see the proposal repealed and then not replaced

If nations from groups 2 and 3 united behind a repeal, it would pass. Then discussion could begin about wether a new proposal should take it's place.

I believe that before any discussion about a replacement proposal is to take place, that the current resolution should be repealed.

If either group 2 or group 3 gets offside with the reasons for the repeal before the repeal process starts, then the resolution may never be repealed - and that is bad news for both groups.

Coquetvia, you forgot a group

4) those who don't care one way or the other

Forgottenlands, you have made a very good and appreciated contribution to the issue of DVD region removal, and the repeal of this resolution.

You have made very good arguments, some of which I agree, others not. But the most important thing about your post from my eyes is that you have put forward an intelligent argument. That is what is needed about this issue - intelligent conversation that is willing to put forward arguments.

I believe that, at least for now, that there are 3 stands on this issue.

1) Nations that like the proposal the way it is,

2) Nations that like the basic idea of the proposal, but who believe the current resolution need to be repealed and then replaced

3) Nations that dislike the idea, and wish to see the proposal repealed and then not replaced

If nations from groups 2 and 3 united behind a repeal, it would pass. Then discussion could begin about wether a new proposal should take it's place.

I believe that before any discussion about a replacement proposal is to take place, that the current resolution should be repealed.

If either group 2 or group 3 gets offside with the reasons for the repeal before the repeal process starts, then the resolution may never be repealed - and that is bad news for both groups.

Personally, I'm a fan of the way Reformatia did it - had a possible replacement in place before he campaigned for a repeal. It worked really well for him - and it was the first repeal to go through with the line to the effect of "repeals this resolution so that the UN may construct a new one".

The other thing is that you'd find those 4 groups for any past resolution - they just vary in size depending on the resolution...

Why is there a need for the UN to even consider this issue? have we not got better things to do that legislate on DVDs of all things? While we're at it, let's make VHS mandatory for video formats. 'Oh, but they're out-dated', you may say. Well, some nations don't have the luxury of DVDs or videos - we're concentrating on more important matters, such as ensuring that our people don't go hungry.

M Vergniaud

Why are we even bothering? Leave it be, for re-inserting DVD Region codes will cause chaos as millions of devices are rendered useless and billions upon billions of dollars lost.

The Fallen Races makes a good point here. The resolution has been in place for so long now that to repeal it now will economically damage those companies that make and produce the dvd's and their relater hardware far more than they could ever benefit from the diminished trade caused by reinserting region codes.

As for the why bother argument: The reason the UN must bother is that although this is an issue that would IRL be placed before the World Trade Organization, Nation States doesn't have one. All such agencies are combined in the UN.

--dunerat

more reasoning is required in the resolution as to why it needs to be dealt with as an issue by the United Nations.
There is no need for more reasons. UN did deal with this resolution and the effect is clearly stated (no DVD regional codes) and good.

Why not let the market do what it wants with DVD's?
To let the market do what it wants with DVDs requires this resolution forbidding regional codes, because regional codes are a means to warp the market.
The DVD regional code would overrule the laws of the market by artificially creating monopolies.

It seems more and more likely that this resolution will not be repealed. The major two reasons for this appear to be:

1) No replacement resolution has been offered

2) The original resolution is now so firmly entrenched that no-one wants to remove it for fear of damaging the industry.

I will still support the repeal of resolution #5, but I remain in the camp that believes that the UN should not deal with DVD's. As such, I won't be making any replacement resolution.

However, I will assist anyone who wishes to make a replacement resolution as far as getting the original resolution repealed, and depending on the framing and arguments of the replacement, may be convinced to re-evaluate my position on the matter.

In the meantime, I will consider myself opposed to resoultion #5 on all counts.