NationStates

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:09 am**

Right, so. Now that that line of inquiry has run its course, do we have any more suggestions? Or shall I go ahead and submit this?

-E. Rory Hywel
WA Ambassador for Embolalia

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:13 am**

I, for one, would rather see submission delayed until there's a good replacement also ready to go.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:30 am**

Sanctaria wrote:I'm not criticising your resolution. You yourself have said that fair use and fair dealings are, while similar, different concepts. You defined "fair use" in a certain way in your resolution, but you can't say that because "fair use" is this in one country in the real words, it must be this in the NS world.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, because it indeed must be that in NationStates. Fair use has one meaning. Nations in NS can go ahead and call something 'fair use,' but unless it matches what is in the United States, it is not actually fair use. It is only some other concept that borrows the term. It would be like me saying, "Well, just because murder is taking somebody's life in the real world, that doesn't mean it must be that in the NS world."

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:41 am**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:I'm not criticising your resolution. You yourself have said that fair use and fair dealings are, while similar, different concepts. You defined "fair use" in a certain way in your resolution, but you can't say that because "fair use" is this in one country in the real words, it must be this in the NS world.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, because it indeed must be that in NationStates. Fair use has one meaning. Nations in NS can go ahead and call something 'fair use,' but unless it matches what is in the United States, it is not actually fair use. It is only some other concept that borrows the term. It would be like me saying, "Well, just because murder is taking somebody's life in the real world, that doesn't mean it must be that in the NS world."

Contrary to what you believe, the US does not have dibs on the meanings of every word.

Fair use also exists in Poland. It's different to the US. So are you going to say the Polish fair use is wrong too?

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:46 am**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:I'm not criticising your resolution. You yourself have said that fair use and fair dealings are, while similar, different concepts. You defined "fair use" in a certain way in your resolution, but you can't say that because "fair use" is this in one country in the real words, it must be this in the NS world.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, because it indeed must be that in NationStates. Fair use has one meaning. Nations in NS can go ahead and call something 'fair use,' but unless it matches what is in the United States, it is not actually fair use. It is only some other concept that borrows the term. It would be like me saying, "Well, just because murder is taking somebody's life in the real world, that doesn't mean it must be that in the NS world."

If fair use is precisely and only the one specific statute which is used in one specific real world country, and has absolutely no general meaning as a phrase, it would be a RL reference and illegal. It would be like referring to Tor, rather than the general idea of a distributed, multi-layer anonymization service. But the phrase "fair use" does have a generalizable meaning. It just means "to use in a fair way". So while it may be the case that only one RL nation uses the phrase "fair use" in its statue on what constitutes a fair use of a copyrighted work, that doesn't mean that fair use as a generalized concept is strictly and exclusively American. It certainly isn't the case that the only way to define a use which is fair as the specific American definition of fair use. Either way, it wouldn't be the first time the WA generalized a term or concept to better fit its own circumstance.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 11:26 am**

Cleric Joran Kell leans back in his chair and sips his coffee. When the Radiant Council gave him the WA post to get him as far from Illirea as possible, he didn't expect it to be so entertaining. He passed a note to his aide to bring him some popcorn and settled in to watch the rest of the show.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:40 pm**

Embolalia wrote:If fair use is precisely and only the one specific statute which is used in one specific real world country, and has absolutely no general meaning as a phrase, it would be a RL reference and illegal.

You clearly don't understand that rule, then. Citing the United States law that implemented fair use would be a real-world violation. The fact remains that fair use is a specific legal principle. Calling something else 'fair use' does not make it fair use.

Sanctaria wrote:Fair use also exists in Poland. It's different to the US. So are you going to say the Polish fair use is wrong too?

Yes. Poland does not have true fair use. It has a bastardized version of fair use, which is why it's referred to as "Polish fair use." I don't understand what's so difficult about this. You can't call something fair use unless it's actually fair use. If it's not the actual doctrine, then you need to qualify the term, because it's a completely separate doctrine from actual fair use.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:52 pm**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Embolalia wrote:If fair use is precisely and only the one specific statute which is used in one specific real world country, and has absolutely no general meaning as a phrase, it would be a RL reference and illegal.

You clearly don't understand that rule, then. Citing the United States law that implemented fair use would be a real-world violation. The fact remains that fair use is a specific legal principle. Calling something else 'fair use' does not make it fair use.

Sanctaria wrote:Fair use also exists in Poland. It's different to the US. So are you going to say the Polish fair use is wrong too?

Yes. Poland does not have true fair use. It has a bastardized version of fair use, which is why it's referred to as "Polish fair use." I don't understand what's so difficult about this. You can't call something fair use unless it's actually fair use. If it's not the actual doctrine, then you need to qualify the term, because it's a completely separate doctrine from actual fair use.

No comment...

In any event, we support this resolution, if not for its intent, merely to spite Dr. Castro for his non-sensical perception of "fair use."

Yours,

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:02 pm**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:
Embolalia wrote:If fair use is precisely and only the one specific statute which is used in one specific real world country, and has absolutely no general meaning as a phrase, it would be a RL reference and illegal.

You clearly don't understand that rule, then. Citing the United States law that implemented fair use would be a real-world violation. The fact remains that fair use is a specific legal principle. Calling something else 'fair use' does not make it fair use.

Sanctaria wrote:Fair use also exists in Poland. It's different to the US. So are you going to say the Polish fair use is wrong too?

Yes. Poland does not have true fair use. It has a bastardized version of fair use, which is why it's referred to as "Polish fair use." I don't understand what's so difficult about this. You can't call something fair use unless it's actually fair use. If it's not the actual doctrine, then you need to qualify the term, because it's a completely separate doctrine from actual fair use.

So, essentially, Polish people aren't true Scotsmen?

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:38 pm**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Yes. Poland does not have true fair use. It has a bastardized version of fair use, which is why it's referred to as "Polish fair use." I don't understand what's so difficult about this. You can't call something fair use unless it's actually fair use. If it's not the actual doctrine, then you need to qualify the term, because it's a completely separate doctrine from actual fair use.

No, I referred to it as "Polish fair use"; it's actually just called "fair use". I don't think you've noticed, but it is you who is being difficult. I don't understand why you're failing to see that the same words can have different meanings depending on where you are.

For example, in Ireland when one says it is "mild" out, it means it's quite warm, and it's generally quite good. However, travel to the Mediterranean, and when you refer to the weather as "mild", it means it's not that warm, and there's a good chance the weather will deteriorate.

Just because the US has "x" doctrine, it doesn't mean it is the definitive doctrine.

IC

Ambassador, you have our support in this endeavour.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:31 pm**

Sanctaria wrote:No, I referred to it as "Polish fair use"; it's actually just called "fair use".

No, I'm pretty sure it's distinguished as "Polish fair use," considering it's not reflective of the actual fair use doctrine. Maybe in Poland it's just called "fair use." But in an international context, calling it simply "fair use" is mistaken. That leads one to believe that it's the actual fair use doctrine as originated in the United States.

Sanctaria wrote:Just because the US has "x" doctrine, it doesn't mean it is the definitive doctrine.

And this is where you're not being reasonable. The United States invented fair use. It is the original fair use. When you say 'fair use,' you're talking about the doctrine that exists in the United States. Poland has its own version, yes, but you can't call it fair use, because it's not the equivalent of the actual fair use doctrine. Full stop. That's it. Seriously, go to your library and pull out a book on fair use. It will describe a bunch of United States legal precedents. It's quite simple, and I'm not going to continue to argue this.

Posted: **Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:42 pm**

i support this wholeheartedly and would approve it if it were ever to be proposed

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:10 pm**

Do we have any more comments before I submit this?

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:09 pm**

I demand a clause providing free alcoholic beverages to me.

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 9:22 pm**

Linux and the X wrote:I demand a clause providing free alcoholic beverages to me.

I'm afraid it would be illegal to include that requirement in a repeal. You'll have to get that into the replacement.

-E. Rory Hywel
WA Ambassador for Embolalia

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:20 pm**

Embolalia wrote:
Linux and the X wrote:I demand a clause providing free alcoholic beverages to me.

I'm afraid it would be illegal to include that requirement in a repeal. You'll have to get that into the replacement.

-E. Rory Hywel
WA Ambassador for Embolalia

Illegal? ILLEGAL!? WHEN DID YOU JOIN THE FASCISTS, HYWEL?

Posted: **Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:43 pm**

If there's no further comment, I plan to submit this around noon tomorrow, EST. (about 13.5 hours from now)

Posted: **Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:28 pm**

I thank the member nation for bringing this to the General Assembly Chamber and support his initiative in doing so. As I am a delegate of Tricell INC which is predominately an industrial region, I would have to consider very carefully whether this would gain my nation's, and region's support. However, I do express my initial support for the proposal.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:31 am**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:(snip)

OOC: Please stop talking.

-----------------------

IC: The Saeraen Queendom fully supports this resolution, and will gladly vote for it if and/or when it reaches the assembly floor.

Mäl. Celerea Lozhqi,
Queen of Free Lands,
Saeran Sulsae

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:50 am**

Blerg. I forgot to apply for WA membership with the nation I'm going to submit with. This should be submitted within the next 24 hours.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:30 pm**

Saeran Sulsae wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:(snip)
OOC: Please stop talking.

[OOC] Your IC personality may have the right to request that another ambassador be less verbose, but your OOC <player> voice has no right whatsoever to tell another player to STFU, no matter how politely you phrase it. Don't do it again.

Frisbeeteria, Game Moderator

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:06 pm**

Got my application approval very quickly, so it has been submitted!

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:16 pm**

OOC: As soon as you submitted this, I got a TG from the World Assembly about it. This is a great and terrible feature.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:05 pm**

Glen-Rhodes wrote:OOC: As soon as you submitted this, I got a TG from the World Assembly about it. This is a great and terrible feature.

OOC: God, the TG spam Flib must get from NAPA...

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:14 pm**

Embolalia wrote:
Glen-Rhodes wrote:OOC: As soon as you submitted this, I got a TG from the World Assembly about it. This is a great and terrible feature.

OOC: God, the TG spam Flib must get from NAPA...

OOC: There was one day I woke up and has 14 TGs regarding Disability Welfare Act repeals. So annoying. There should be an opt-out.

NationStates

[PASSED] Repeal "World Assembly Copyright Charter"

your proposal is good