[PASSED] Freedom to Read and Learn

[Sionis Prioratus]

I see no problem with this at all. In fact, why not broaden it? This is the "Freedom to Learn" proposal after all. Why not "No person shall be punished for reading, learning, studying, or otherwise acting to acquire knowledge and skills..."

Building bombs is a skill. Assassination could be called a skill. Shall we make it illegal for governments to outlaw the building of bombs, or the acquisition of the knowledge to build bombs? Or make it illegal for governments to outlaw schools for assassins? Or other such extreme activities.

We share the same concerns, Your Excellency.

Yours in drinking a pint of beer,

[Quelesh]

[S]o perhaps wording more like "this resolution does not prohibit member states from regulating or banning..." would be acceptable?

It is always our pleasure to work on wording born out of reasonable compromise. We shall make revisions in due time, we would hope to Your Excellency's satisfaction.

I am pleased to hear that, and look forward to seeing the revision.

Yours taking a photo of elephants mating,

*Alexandria lifts her eyebrow and tilts her head to the side* Would you care to share with the rest of the class?

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

[Sionis Prioratus]

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDS past initiatives to build libraries and guarantee freedom of expression,

AFFIRMS that those advancements are meaningless without the right to access written knowledge,

FURTHER AFFIRMS that the World Assembly does not prohibit member states to regulate or ban certain works, for example pornographic works, works advocating, inciting or encouraging disorder, violence, lawlessness and/or illegal acts,

Declares:

No person shall be punished for reading, nor for enabling oneself and/or another to read, nor for acquiring knowledge and/or cultural enrichment from reading material adapted for individuals with disabilities or other kinds of non-readable media, subject to the following exceptions:

Nations shall carve exceptions for materials forbidden by the World Assembly and may carve exceptions for autobiographical works intended to remain private by the author, unauthorized copies of upcoming tests, materials not intended for the duration of a test, private biographical records, as well as for knowingly receiving stolen materials.

[Tribes Republic]

The Colony Of Tribes Republic seconds this, but would like to add audio, video, and oral learning

[Sionis Prioratus]

The Colony Of Tribes Republic seconds this, but would like to add audio, video, and oral learning

We are exceedingly humbled by Your Excellency's words of support, and we are joyously glad to inform that "audio, video, and oral learning" are included under:

No person shall be punished for reading, nor for enabling oneself and/or another to read, nor for acquiring knowledge and/or cultural enrichment from reading material adapted for individuals with disabilities or other kinds of non-readable media, subject to the following exceptions:

Yours reading a poem by a fountain,

[Dilange]

How to Make a Dirty Bomb

We would not want a book such as this being possessed by anyone.

Hey I wrote that book!! Its an excellent read. It talks about science, chemistry, history, warfare, politics, geography, meterology, etc. Its a great read for militan-*cough* I mean avid learners.

[Dilange]

First time I saw your draft, I was thinking "I need no edjewmacation"

Then I read it, and realized it was an anti-censorship proposal.

I'm good with it.

[Cowardly Pacifists]

As long as we're dealing with exceptions in Clause 2, should we not have an exception for classified materials. It might rightly be a crime to "enable another to read" secret dossiers on troop movements, or highly-classified intelligence files.

[Sionis Prioratus]

As long as we're dealing with exceptions in Clause 2, should we not have an exception for classified materials. It might rightly be a crime to "enable another to read" secret dossiers on troop movements, or highly-classified intelligence files.

Your Excellency, is not that included under "knowingly receiving stolen materials"? If not, (why not, if not?) alternative wordings would be deeply appreciated.

Yours ever humbled by Your Excellency's engagement,

[Araraukar]

Erm, the proposal seems to currently lack strength, and we believe that's a requirement for a lawful proposal? We read the debate, but the proposal itself seems to not have it written anywhere at the moment.

[Linux and the X]

FURTHER AFFIRMS that the World Assembly does not prohibit member states to regulate or ban certain works, for example pornographic works, works advocating, inciting or encouraging disorder, violence, lawlessness and/or illegal acts,

Although this is (we believe) only affirming the present state of affairs, we ask that the wording be modified slightly to ensure it cannot be interpreted as a blocker in the future.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Erm, the proposal seems to currently lack strength, and we believe that's a requirement for a lawful proposal? We read the debate, but the proposal itself seems to not have it written anywhere at the moment.

Your Excellency, we are sorry for the lacking information. We did remove it because, whilst important, we believed debating the submission strength was detracting from the debate of the text itself, which we believed (and believe) was/is far more important at the moment. That said, we are still tending towards a "significant" strength.

Yours preserving a pheasant in liquid nitrogen,

[Sionis Prioratus]

FURTHER AFFIRMS that the World Assembly does not prohibit member states to regulate or ban certain works, for example pornographic works, works advocating, inciting or encouraging disorder, violence, lawlessness and/or illegal acts,

Although this is (we believe) only affirming the present state of affairs, we ask that the wording be modified slightly to ensure it cannot be interpreted as a blocker in the future.

Your Excellency, would "RECOGNIZES" be an acceptable verb vis-à-vis Your Excellency's concerns?

Yours learning an extinct language,

[Cowardly Pacifists]

As long as we're dealing with exceptions in Clause 2, should we not have an exception for classified materials. It might rightly be a crime to "enable another to read" secret dossiers on troop movements, or highly-classified intelligence files.

Your Excellency, is not that included under "knowingly receiving stolen materials"? If not, (why not, if not?) alternative wordings would be deeply appreciated.

Yours ever humbled by Your Excellency's engagement,

I don't think it's covered by "knowingly receiving stolen materials." One can lawfully be in possession of classified materials (i.e. you didn't steal them, you were trusted with them) but still have an obligation not to let others read them. No one would say that the five star general "stole" the file on recent troop movements; he's allowed to look at that and even keep it in his office. But he nonetheless is doing something bad if he lets the journalist he's sleeping with read the file.

Same with lawyers. They may lawfully possess or even own their client's file, but it's still a confidentiality problem if they're letting strangers read it. Same with doctors...

The easy fix is just what I said: we need an exception for "materials deemed secret or classified."

Edits: Spelling and grammar.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Your Excellency, is not that included under "knowingly receiving stolen materials"? If not, (why not, if not?) alternative wordings would be deeply appreciated.

Yours ever humbled by Your Excellency's engagement,

I don't think it's covered by "knowingly receiving stolen materials." One can lawfully be in possession of classified materials (i.e. you didn't steal them, you were trusted with them) but still have an obligation not to let others read them. No one would say that the five star general "stole" the file on recent troop movements; he's allowed to look at that and even keep it in his office. But he nonetheless is doing something bad if he lets the journalist he's sleeping with read the file.

Same with lawyers. They may lawfully possess or even own their client's file, but it's still a confidentiality problem if they're letting strangers read it. Same with doctors...

The easy fix is just what I said: we need an exception for "materials deemed secret or classified."

It shall be done, Your Excellency! I thank Your Excellency immensely. Is there anything else Your Excellency would like to point out at the moment?

Yours puzzled at a weird painting,

[Sionis Prioratus]

I read it, and realized it was an anti-censorship proposal.

I'm good with it.

I thank Your Excellency for Your Excellency's support! Pray do remain engaged.

Yours marvelled at the innocence of youths,

[Linux and the X]

Although this is (we believe) only affirming the present state of affairs, we ask that the wording be modified slightly to ensure it cannot be interpreted as a blocker in the future.

Your Excellency, would "RECOGNIZES" be an acceptable verb vis-à-vis Your Excellency's concerns?

Yours learning an extinct language,

Hrm. It's better, but it could still be misread. Perhaps the emphasis should be on the resolution itself having no bans. This might also confirm that you are not merely recognising the status quo merely to change it for some readers.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Your Excellency, would "RECOGNIZES" be an acceptable verb vis-à-vis Your Excellency's concerns?

Yours learning an extinct language,

Hrm. It's better, but it could still be misread. Perhaps the emphasis should be on the resolution itself having no bans. This might also confirm that you are not merely recognising the status quo merely to change it for some readers.

What about:

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDS past initiatives to build libraries and guarantee freedom of expression,

AFFIRMS that those advancements are of little value without the right to access knowledge,

RECOGNIZES that the World Assembly does not prohibit nor obligate member states to regulate or ban certain works, for example pornographic works, works advocating, inciting or encouraging disorder, violence, lawlessness and/or illegal acts,

Enacts:

No person shall be punished for reading, nor for enabling oneself and/or another to read, nor for acquiring knowledge and/or cultural enrichment from non-readable media or reading material adapted for individuals with disabilities, subject to the following exceptions:

Nations shall carve exceptions for materials forbidden by the World Assembly and may carve exceptions for autobiographical works intended to remain private by the author, unauthorized copies of upcoming tests, materials not intended for the duration of a test, private biographical records, materials deemed secret or classified, as well as for knowingly receiving stolen materials.

We are also somewhat inclined towards removing or reducing the enumeration of examples. What does Your Excellency think?

Yours swimming,

[Bears Armed]

Loophole: Watch some nations "classify" everything that their governments would like to censor...

[Sionis Prioratus]

Loophole: Watch some nations "classify" everything that their governments would like to censor...

Hm, we see. In Your Excellency's opinion, would the following change close the loophole?

Nations shall carve exceptions for materials forbidden by the World Assembly and may carve exceptions for private biographical records, autobiographical works intended to remain private by the author, unauthorized copies of upcoming tests, materials not intended for the duration of a test, materials obtained by espionage, as well as for knowingly receiving stolen materials.

Yours,

[Benomia]

After reading this, I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually outlaw the government banning written works.
As a concsequence, it doesn't really affect is. We're going to vote AGAINST it for the sole reason of we don't want the WA micromanaging nations' governments.

[Sionis Prioratus]

After reading this, I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually outlaw the government banning written works.
As a concsequence (sic), it doesn't really affect is. (sic) We're going to vote against it for the sole reason of we don't want the WA micromanaging nations' governments.

Is Your Excellency sure to have read World Assembly resolution #30, "Freedom of Expression"? Please, may Your Excellency have this marked up copy.

Freedom of Expression
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.

Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Omigodtheykilledkenny

Description: Assured that freedom of expression is an essential human right deserving of international protection;

Determined that no one should have to put their lives, families, liberty or property at risk for expressing honest dissent with, otherwise criticizing or even satirizing their leaders, governments, societies, churches or any other institutions of established power;

Chastened by the sacrifices already made by prisoners and victims of conscience throughout the world;

Nonetheless convinced that free expression does not extend to such abuses as defamation, incitements to disorder, or academic fraud;

Agreed that for purposes of this resolution defamation is defined as the use of knowingly false information, or the raising of such with reckless disregard for its truthfulness, in a deliberate attempt to impugn the character or reputation of any individual, group or organization, excepting government institutions or political leaders,

Be it therefore resolved that the World Assembly:

Affirms the right of all people to express their personal, moral, political, cultural, religious and ideological views freely and openly, without fear of reprisal;

Requires member states to respect and uphold this right in all available media to all individuals under their jurisdiction;

Expects member states to enforce this right fairly and equitably in the application of national laws;

Allows member states to set reasonable restrictions on expression in order to prevent defamation, as well as plagiarism, copyright or trademark infringement, and other forms of academic fraud; incitements to widespread lawlessness and disorder, or violence against any individual, group or organization; the unauthorized disclosure of highly classified government information; the unauthorized disclosure of strictly confidential personal information; and blatant, explicit and offensive pornographic materials;

Forbids member states from abusing these restrictions in an effort to stifle free expression among law-abiding citizens.

Votes For: 3,225
Votes Against: 992

Implemented Thu Jan 1 2009

Yours in searching the cure for forgetfulness,

[Benomia]

And yet pray few nations actually follow that, what with all the genocide happening.

[Bears Armed]

Loophole: Watch some nations "classify" everything that their governments would like to censor...

Hm, we see. In Your Excellency's opinion, would the following change close the loophole?

Nations shall carve exceptions for materials forbidden by the World Assembly and may carve exceptions for private biographical records, autobiographical works intended to remain private by the author, unauthorized copies of upcoming tests, materials not intended for the duration of a test, materials obtained by espionage, as well as for knowingly receiving stolen materials.

Hr'rmm...

Nations shall carve exceptions for materials forbidden by the World Assembly and may carve exceptions for private biographical records, autobiographical works intended to remain private by the author, unauthorized copies of upcoming tests, materials not intended for the duration of a test, materials obtained by espionage, and/or materials subject to professional confidentiality, as well as for knowingly receiving stolen materials.

?

[Cowardly Pacifists]

^I like it.