NationStates

Repeal 'Open Internet Order'
Category: Repeal

---

This august World Assembly,

Restating, again that:

1. one-size-fits-all legislation of this sort generally fails to adequately consider the specific situations in which nations may find themselves, thereby preventing them from applying relevant and situationally apt policy and
2. it is impossible to amend legislation and patch these issues, thereby making repeal the only option,

Concerned that Open Internet Order imposes cumbersome regulations which, due to high transaction costs, cannot be worked around, thereby leading to delays in network expansion and access,

Believing that the resolution's definition of 'internet service provider' includes national governments, as many governments provide information services to their citizens so they can access information necessary for fulfilling and productive lives,

Extremely distressed by clause 6 in the resolution, empowering the Telecommunication(s) Regulatory Authority to issue fines and declaratory rulings against ISPs at its own discretion, which when combined with the general vagueness of the resolution, allows the World Assembly to use these discretionary powers to raise revenue against national governments,

Perturbed with the privacy and national security implications of permitting an international agency to examine ISP (and therefore, government) data, information, and services without any oversight, at its own discretion, allowing international bureaucrats to look into the finances of subscribers, trade secrets of domestic companies, and the security preparations of the government,

Laughing at the ineffectiveness of the resolution at actually fulfilling its goals, as its definition of 'reasonable network management' allows a massive loophole of undefined 'legal grounds', which can easily be expanded by national governments, meaning the author has created a terrifying regulatory agency which fails to actually expand access in any way, saddling the member nations with all the costs of regulation and none of the benefits,

Disappointed that the resolution provides a cut-out for governments to create unlawful content, thereby allowing them to censor information and render the benefits of creating an open Internet utterly meaningless, and

Suspecting that any consistent interpretation of the resolution is in an incredible double-bind, as either it:

1. prevents internet providers from prioritising basic switching packets, thereby slowing down the entire network and restricting access for everyone, or
   
2. falls into 'reasonable network management', which means that practically all traffic prioritisation schemes can be run through such a loophole, making the resolution meaningless,

Hereby repeals 395 GA 'Open Internet Order'.

Believing that the resolution's definition of 'internet service provider' includes national governments,

(a) "Internet Service Provider" as an entity that directly controls and operates facilities that are used to provide Internet access.

Extremely distressed by clause 6 in the resolution, empowering the Telecommunication Regulatory Authority to issue fines and declaratory rulings against ISPs at its own discretion, which when combined with the general vagueness of the resolution, allows the World Assembly to use these discretionary powers to raise revenue against national governments,

6. Empowers the Telecommunication Regulatory Authority to issue fines, enforce provision(s) of this resolution and conduct investigations against Internet "Service Providers. The Telecommunication Regulatory Authority may also issue declaratory rulings, at its discretion.

Perturbed with the privacy and national security implications of permitting an international agency to examine ISP data, information, and services without any oversight, and its own discretion,

Laughing at the ineffectiveness of the resolution, as its definition of 'reasonable network management' allows a massive loophole of undefined 'legal grounds', which can easily be expanded by national governments, making it impossible for the resolution to fulfil its goals,

Concerned about the aesthetic precedent of a resolution which fails to abide by sensible formatting conventions designed to ensure readability,

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:"We note that Clause 1b) of the target resolution is constructed with a syntactical ambiguity that appears to permit national regulations to allow throttling of network traffic on grounds including 'avoiding... contractual obligations.' The World Assembly should not be in the business of encouraging entities within member states to abrogate contracts they signed in good faith."

(b) "Reasonable Network Management" allows Internet Service Providers to temporarily throttle access to the network on legal grounds such as avoiding network congestion or contractual obligations.

Bakhton wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

Bakhton wrote:

There can be multiple reasonable interpretations.

Auralia wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:There can be multiple reasonable interpretations.

((OOC: With that said, I think it's clear that the "avoiding" qualifier applies to congestion, not contractual obligations.))

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Concerned about the aesthetic precedent of a resolution which fails to abide by sensible formatting conventions designed to ensure readability,

States of Glory WA Office wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Concerned about the aesthetic precedent of a resolution which fails to abide by sensible formatting conventions designed to ensure readability,

Fairburn: We fully support this aesthetic precedent and will therefore oppose this repeal.

New Dukaine wrote:Support all of your claims, along with a separate claim of a category violation of the targeted resolution.

The Greater Siriusian Domain wrote:Teran Saber: "The Greater Siriusian Domain will only support this provided there is a replacement proposal to the resolution this seeks to repeal. We believe that protecting the right to free speech, as net neutrality legislation does, is incredibly important. Remember, without the right to free speech, people wouldn't even be able to discuss other issues."

Draconae wrote:"Support. We agree with every one of your reasons."

The Greater Siriusian Domain wrote:Teran Saber: "The Greater Siriusian Domain will only support this provided there is a replacement proposal to the resolution this seeks to repeal. We believe that protecting the right to free speech, as net neutrality legislation does, is incredibly important. Remember, without the right to free speech, people wouldn't even be able to discuss other issues."

"We understand your concerns, ambassador. In fact, we are working on a replacement, if you'd like to look at it."

Emmetz wrote:It worries me how this resolution was originally passed by a large majority and now looks set to be repealed by a large majority. Where was this first time round? These forums aren't obvious enough.

Emmetz wrote:It worries me how this resolution was originally passed by a large majority and now looks set to be repealed by a large majority. Where was this first time round? These forums aren't obvious enough.