NationStates Jolt Archive


Network Neutrality Act of 2008

Gravelles
27-05-2008, 21:56
Greetings-

We urge your support for the Network Neutrality Act of 2008, which is currently in need of a quorum at the World Assembly.

The text of the resolution follows:

The World Assembly,

Believing strongly in the protection of equal access to information, trade opportunities and freedom from nondiscriminatory practices by broadband network providers on the Internet,

Article 1.

ESTABLISHES what constitutes discrimination by broadband network providers;

(a) It shall be unlawful for any broadband network provider—

(1) to fail to provide its broadband network services on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions such that any person can offer or provide content, applications, or services to or over the network at least equal to the manner in which the provider or its affiliates offer content, applications, and services, free of any surcharge on the basis of the content, application or service;

(2) to refuse to interconnect its facilities with the facilities of another provider of broadband network services on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms or conditions;

(3)(A) to block, to impair, to discriminate against, or to interfere with the ability of any person to use a broadband network service to access, to use, to send, to receive, or to offer lawful content, applications or services over the Internet; or

(B) to impose an additional charge to avoid any conduct that is prohibited by this subsection;

(4) to prohibit a user from attaching or using a device on the provider's network that does not physically damage or materially degrade other users' utilization of the network; or

(5) to fail clearly and conspicuously disclose to users, in plain language, accurate information concerning any terms, conditions, or limitations on the broadband network service;

(b) If a broadband network provider prioritizes or offers enhanced quality of service to data of a particular type, it must prioritize or offer enhanced quality of service to all data of that type (regardless of the origin or ownership of such data) without imposing a surcharge or other consideration for such prioritization or enhanced quality of service;

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent a broadband network provider from taking reasonable and nondiscriminatory measures—

(1) to manage the functioning of its network, on a systemwide basis, provided that any such management function does not result in discrimination between content, applications, or services offered by the provider and unaffiliated provider;

(2) to give priority to emergency communications;

(3) to prevent a violation of a WA Member State law, or to comply with an order of a court to enforce such law;

(4) to offer consumer protection services (such as parental controls), provided that a user may refuse or disable such services;

(5) to offer special promotional pricing or other marketing initiatives; or

(6) to prioritize or offer enhanced quality of service to all data of a particular type (regardless of origin or ownership of such data) without imposing a surcharge or other consideration for such prioritization or quality of service;

Article 2.

DEFINES 'Network Neutrality' as that which is considered acceptable under Article 1;

Article 3.

APPROVES the formation of the World Assembly Internet Communications Commission (WAICC);

(a) whose mission is to ensure that the standards of Network Neutrality are adhered to by all WA Member States;

(b) whose mission is not to infringe upon the sovereign right of states to block content on the Internet lawfully deemed unacceptable.

Cordially,

Peter H. Gibbons
Secretary of State
Dominion of Gravelles
The Most Glorious Hack
28-05-2008, 06:17
Category? Strength?
Quintessence of Dust
28-05-2008, 06:21
Free Trade/Strong, which kind of makes sense as it's an antitrust proposal. But I will point out its operative section is directly lifted from RL US law (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5994).
Kennedosia
28-05-2008, 06:45
Free Trade/Strong, which kind of makes sense as it's an antitrust proposal. But I will point out its operative section is directly lifted from RL US law (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5994).

You are correct that Article 1 of this act is lifted from H.R. 5417, the Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2006, which can be found in its entirety here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h5417rh.txt.pdf

However, I was under the impression that borrowing from another law was fine as long as it wasn't someone else work from this site. To clarify, as long as I didn't steal from another nation on this site, I thought that I was in the clear.

It's good legislation. Why not adopt it?

From "Rules For WA Proposals [Now Binding]" located at http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465

Proposal Stealing

If it can be proven that you've simply copy and pasted somebody else's Proposal and submitted it as your own, it'll be deleted, and you may be ejected from the WA as well.

Now, unless someone else has already submitted this text to the WA, I don't believe that I fall within the definition of what constitutes stealing a Proposal.
Kennedosia
28-05-2008, 06:48
Free Trade/Strong, which kind of makes sense as it's an antitrust proposal. But I will point out its operative section is directly lifted from RL US law (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5994).

Hell, the link you provided links to a totally different bill than that which I copied from. The Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 is where you sourced from, however, I lifted Article 1 of my act from the Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2006!

If every bill has to be different, how could anything get done?
The Most Glorious Hack
28-05-2008, 13:18
Now, unless someone else has already submitted this text to the WA, I don't believe that I fall within the definition of what constitutes stealing a Proposal.Sigh.

Plagiarism is also against the rules. I mean... seriously... do I really need to say the obvious?
Flibbleites
28-05-2008, 17:05
Sigh.

Plagiarism is also against the rules. I mean... seriously... do I really need to say the obvious?

Apparently yes.
The Eastquelands
29-05-2008, 05:47
Apparently yes.

I'm not talking about stealing an essay, newspaper article or a book. I'm talking about implementing a system or concept. Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but the law only documents how the system works. The point is to pass good legislation.

By the way, speaking of plagiarism, were any of you folks aware that someone ripped off this game on Facebook and called it "Nations?"
Gobbannium
29-05-2008, 22:10
I'm not talking about stealing an essay, newspaper article or a book. I'm talking about implementing a system or concept. Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but the law only documents how the system works. The point is to pass good legislation.

You're wrong; the law defines how the system works. Anyway, that's irrelevant to the whole plagiarism business. If you were just lifting a system or concept from the outside world, there wouldn't be a problem. It's lifting the words, even from outside the game, that people have issues with.