Advertisement
by Sionis Prioratus » Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:17 pm
by Serrland » Wed Jul 07, 2010 3:27 pm
by American Southrons » Wed Jul 07, 2010 4:31 pm
by TailsPrower » Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:25 pm
by Krioval » Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:09 pm
TailsPrower wrote:i find it to be fascinating but there is one flaw... if you cannot create companies/organizations with the same usage of letters that is i'm not so much sure of the program if they are the same but have apparently similar aspects to it.
this is the company/program with the same letters that you are trying to form, which is IDEA. well this is the link to the website anyhow: http://idea.ed.gov/ along with http://www.idea.int/ . just throwing it out there because i am not all that clear on legal and illegal proposals... but if you cannot create organizations/companies/programs that EXIST and/or are similar in ways then I'd define it as illegal but if you can then by all means go for it.
by TailsPrower » Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:45 pm
by Mousebumples » Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:52 pm
American Southrons wrote:I would like to know how this can actually affect nations that much to be considered for a GA Proposal.
Krioval wrote:Excellent. I am glad to see that this has qualified for a floor vote, and I look forward to this resolution's swift passage.
The Palentine wrote:The Palentine votes enthusiastically for this resolution.
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:We have found absolutely nothing wrong that can be realistically resolved. Acknowledging the justification for a newsletter instead of a journal, Ms. Harper is pleased to vote in favour. It would also be interesting to see if the IDEA newsletter would be the subject of a non-canon roleplay in future, considering the current enthusiasm for the ICC.
Sionis Prioratus wrote:We vote AYE. Here is hoping that the superlative Delegation from Mousebumples shall break their own world record! For it is a superlative resolution.
Serrland wrote:Serrland was more than happy to approve and then vote for this proposal. It is well written, comprehensive, and unlike many WA proposals, will have a clear and tangible impact on the lives of nearly every citizen of Serrland.
Krioval wrote:OOC: As long as the agency doesn't exist in the NS-verse, it can be created and given any name/acronym the proposal author desires - providing that the agency's creation doesn't violate the standard rules about writing proposals. If you're more interested in proposal writing, I'd suggest reading the stickies at the top of the forum thread list or starting a new thread if you have a general question.
by Furnda » Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:18 pm
by The Asylum Manager » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:10 am
by Bears Armed » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:20 am
Mousebumples wrote:To further elaborate on Krioval's point, I don't believe that it would be legal for me to create, say, the WHO - as the World Health Organization. However, if I wanted to create the WHO, which had a different name and purpose ... say the Witness Hiding Organization (WHO), that would be legal. It's not allowed to replicate already existing RL bodies in name and action (and recreating their bylaws/etc. for the GA would likely be a plagiarism violation); however, it is permissible to use the same acronym letters within the WA. Most good acronyms are already taken by one, if not more than one, organization in RL. If we crossed all of those off the list, it would remove all of the fun ones.
by Charlotte Ryberg » Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:39 pm
Bears Armed wrote:Mousebumples wrote:To further elaborate on Krioval's point, I don't believe that it would be legal for me to create, say, the WHO - as the World Health Organization. However, if I wanted to create the WHO, which had a different name and purpose ... say the Witness Hiding Organization (WHO), that would be legal. It's not allowed to replicate already existing RL bodies in name and action (and recreating their bylaws/etc. for the GA would likely be a plagiarism violation); however, it is permissible to use the same acronym letters within the WA. Most good acronyms are already taken by one, if not more than one, organization in RL. If we crossed all of those off the list, it would remove all of the fun ones.
OOC: However I suspect that using the initials 'UN', for any sort of WA agency, is probably out of the question...
by Zyberkalicystan » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:21 pm
by Mousebumples » Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:42 pm
Zyberkalicystan wrote:IDEA is an awsome acronym-
as is this resolution
by Fultona » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:31 pm
by Mousebumples » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:20 pm
Fultona wrote:Although looking at the votes and noticing that we are in the minority, the Corporate Republic of Fultona must respectfully vote no on this resolution on the grounds of protecting national sovereignty, our health care industry, and the Fultonan tax payer.
by The Asylum Manager » Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:26 am
Fultona wrote:Although looking at the votes and noticing that we are in the minority, the Corporate Republic of Fultona must respectfully vote no on this resolution on the grounds of protecting national sovereignty, our health care industry, and the Fultonan tax payer.
by Tzorsland » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:06 am
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Bears Armed wrote:Mousebumples wrote:To further elaborate on Krioval's point, I don't believe that it would be legal for me to create, say, the WHO - as the World Health Organization. However, if I wanted to create the WHO, which had a different name and purpose ... say the Witness Hiding Organization (WHO), that would be legal. It's not allowed to replicate already existing RL bodies in name and action (and recreating their bylaws/etc. for the GA would likely be a plagiarism violation); however, it is permissible to use the same acronym letters within the WA. Most good acronyms are already taken by one, if not more than one, organization in RL. If we crossed all of those off the list, it would remove all of the fun ones.
OOC: However I suspect that using the initials 'UN', for any sort of WA agency, is probably out of the question...
Not if it refers to the "Union of Navigators", in a cartography and navigation resolution, for example.
In 2000, the World Wide Fund for Nature (also WWF), an environmental organization, sued the World Wrestling Federation. The Law Lords agreed that Titan Sports had violated a 1994 agreement which had limited the permissible use of the WWF initials overseas, particularly in merchandising. Both companies used the initials since March 1979. The last televised event to market the WWF logo was UK based PPV Insurrextion 2002. On May 5, 2002, the company changed all references on its website from "WWF" to "WWE", while switching the URL from WWF.com to WWE.com. The next day, a press release announced the official name change from World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc. to World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., or WWE, and the change was publicized later that day during a telecast of Monday Night Raw, which emanated from the Hartford Civic Center in Hartford, Connecticut. For a short time, WWE used the slogan "Get The 'F' Out." The company had also been ordered by the Lords to stop using the old WWF Attitude logo on any of its properties and to censor all past references to WWF, as they no longer owned the trademark to the initials WWF in 'specified circumstances'. Despite litigation, WWE is still permitted use of the original WWF logo, which was used from 1984 through 1997, as well as the "New WWF Generation" logo, which was used from 1994 through 1998. Furthermore, the company may still make use of the full "World Wrestling Federation" and "World Wrestling Federation Entertainment" names without consequence.
by The Rich Port » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:22 pm
by New Rockport » Fri Jul 09, 2010 3:55 pm
by Greenlandic People » Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:45 pm
by Enn » Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 pm
by Charlotte Ryberg » Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:59 am
by Sionis Prioratus » Sun Jul 11, 2010 10:08 am
by Mousebumples » Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:09 pm
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:Well done on the resolution passing.
Ms Harper is subscribing to the newsletter/journal, I wonder when the first issue will come out?
Sionis Prioratus wrote:Congratulations, Mousey! How does it feel to be the first author to break twice the 80% barrier?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement