[SUBMITTED] Phone Home Act

[Separatist Peoples]

Devices do have and give some kind of warning when one is not on their network provider. Plus one can check their coverage area before hand.

"Not all do. You have no idea how it works in, say, the C.D.S.P.. You're generalizing."

They agreed to the transaction when they used the network.

"So, one agrees to a transaction by taking a step to the left? That is not an outward objective manifestation to bargain for an exchange of considerations. Try again."

Actually, it doesn't. The person has contracted with a provider in their nation. They have not contracted with a provider in the nation they are visiting. They use their device in an other nation, then they are charged what the network provider in that area charges.

"But they haven't used their device. They merely carried it. Much like carrying a gun is not assent to discharge it, carrying a phone into another service provider's area is not assent to use their service."

We'll have to disagree on that fact.

"Then clearly you have absolutely no understanding of how contracts work, ambassador, because that is flatly not how agreeing to a transaction works."

If one travels outside of their coverage and use their device, they should pay extra for using an other provider's network. But as this proposal wants to make network provides to give free services to tourist traveling internationally, not domestically. I'm sorry, but I can't believe that one travelling to an other nation or out of their coverage doesn't know that they are out of their network or that they will be charged extra for phone calls and data usage.

OOC: Voice of personal experience: I was in the US but near the Canadian border and was charged for Canadian network access. When notified of the error, they immediately redacted the charges. Not because they were being nice, but because they charged for a service I had not even attempted to assent to.

IC: "I was pretty explicit in accepting that, should they use their device, they can be charged. After all, exercising dominion over an offered consideration in a manner that indicates ownership is acceptance of the offer, and using a service is a consideration for which a party would have to offer return consideration. A phone merely communicating with a service tower is not accessing the network, but "pinging" it. Merely being in an area and having one's phone make the necessary preliminary connectivity measures to relay that one is in a new area is not acceptance of a network's terms until they are actively accessed willfully by the owner of the phone."

[Calladan]

How should anybody know when they have moved into a competitor's area of coverage?

Devices do have and give some kind of warning when one is not on their network provider. Plus one can check their coverage area before hand.

Why should a person be charged for a transaction they did not agree with?

They agreed to the transaction when they used the network.

Your entire argument takes the basic precepts of contractual transactions and throws it entirely out the window,

Actually, it doesn't. The person has contracted with a provider in their nation. They have not contracted with a provider in the nation they are visiting. They use their device in an other nation, then they are charged what the network provider in that area charges.

If they use that service, they should be charged, but for merely moving lawfully within their borders, they have assented to no exchange.

We'll have to disagree on that fact. If one travels outside of their coverage and use their device, they should pay extra for using an other provider's network. But as this proposal wants to make network provides to give free services to tourist traveling internationally, not domestically. I'm sorry, but I can't believe that one travelling to an other nation or out of their coverage doesn't know that they are out of their network or that they will be charged extra for phone calls and data usage.

My apologies for my previous comments - when you put it like that it makes more sense. I took punishment to be a more literal term than you mean it (as in The WA could exact some kind of retribution should the providers not do what was asked) rather than the simple fact of The WA asking the providers to shoulder the cost of the first 120 minutes.

As to whether that is a legitimate request for The WA to make..... that is another matter.

From a certain point of view, I would still argue that if a mobile provider operates in more than one country (for example Calladan has several providers that operate in Genovia as well) and a user has a contract with one of those providers, then they should NOT be charged if they are using THAT provider in another country (I will provide a fixed example in a moment), but if they do stray to another provider, who then has to provide a service to someone who hasn't paid them anything, then yes - a surcharge for that service is not unreasonable, provided it is not (if you will forgive the phrase) an unreasonable/excessive one.

So - for example :-

DolGudor Mobile Services is a provider that operates in Calladan and Genovia. I am signed up to a contract with them for my phone, as is my wife and my two eldest children.

If we were to go to Genovia, I would not expect to pay a surcharge to use DGMS in Genovia, because it is the same provider.

However if I went to Maryvilleland (where there is no DGMS coverage) then I would probably expect Arrakis Comms (the main mobile service) to charge a surcharge because I am using their services without paying them so having them charge me is not beyond reason.

So - to sum up - it turns out I do agree with you that if you're going to use your phone in another country under another provider, it's not unreasonable to pay for that (and pay more than people who have a contract) I would argue that if it is the same provider as in your country (even if you are not IN your country) then you should not be charged extra (because that is just gouging and I can't see any other term for it).

I still think that the second part - that before you use your phone on another network/provider you should be warned about the charges you will incur - is valid and worthwhile though.

[Jarish Inyo]

"So, one agrees to a transaction by taking a step to the left? That is not an outward objective manifestation to bargain for an exchange of considerations. Try again."

If they accessed to a network other then their provider in anyway, then yes they did.

"But they haven't used their device. They merely carried it. Much like carrying a gun is not assent to discharge it, carrying a phone into another service provider's area is not assent to use their service."

Did you miss the part that I said a person uses their device? After all, this proposal is about a person using their device to make calls or use data.

Then clearly you have absolutely no understanding of how contracts work, ambassador, because that is flatly not how agreeing to a transaction works]

Lets's look at the full statement, shall we?

We'll have to disagree on that fact. If one travels outside of their coverage and use their device, they should pay extra for using an other provider's network.

A person uses a device outside of their coverage area, one is using the product of a provider they are not contracted with. The provider has the right to charge the person extra for use of said product. One does have to remember that coverage areas do vary. The coverage area may not cover the individuals home nation. It could be just a particular region within their nation.

A phone merely communicating with a service tower is not accessing the network, but "pinging" it. Merely being in an area and having one's phone make the necessary preliminary connectivity measures to relay that one is in a new area is not acceptance of a network's terms until they are actively accessed willfully by the owner of the phone.

We'd have to disagree on that. One's device is still accessing the providers network. If a person did not plan to use the device's cellar or data networks, in most devices, one can shut off those off.

if a mobile provider operates in more than one country (for example Calladan has several providers that operate in Genovia as well) and a user has a contract with one of those providers, then they should NOT be charged if they are using THAT provider in another country

I'd have to disagree. If a person's coverage area doesn't cover those other nations, then they should be charged extra for using their device in those nations. The individual's provider shouldn't have to shoulder the cost of a person is using their device outside their coverage area, even if said provider covers that area.

[Calladan]

if a mobile provider operates in more than one country (for example Calladan has several providers that operate in Genovia as well) and a user has a contract with one of those providers, then they should NOT be charged if they are using THAT provider in another country

I'd have to disagree. If a person's coverage area doesn't cover those other nations, then they should be charged extra for using their device in those nations. The individual's provider shouldn't have to shoulder the cost of a person is using their device outside their coverage area, even if said provider covers that area.

Then on that part I guess we will just have to disagree But - if it helps - as the proposal stands, I won't be supporting it, unless it is modified to deal with single providers across multiple nations.

[Gnejs]

Thistle makes some final notes on a piece of paper and hands it to Wilma

- "Here you go, I took the liberty of writing down a few words about the latest draft. Nothing major."

- "Nothing major? This isn't notes, it's a speech."

- "Yeah, well, maybe I got a bit carried away. But I did the revisions, you know. Just read it, Wilma."

- "Fine."

Wilma stands and begins reading out loud

"Honored ambassadors, our delegation hereby puts forward a revised version of our proposal. I hope that the changes we have made will make this endeavor slightly more edible for some of you, although I recognize we will likely never make believers out all of you.

We have tried to be more clear about what kind of communication networks this proposal addresses, in response to the comments from the gentlemen of Wallenburg. Although he have aimed to make things clear, we do not doubt that there are aspects we haven't considered, so feedback on this would be appreciated.

We have also strived to make the proposal less bound to our own level of technology, for example by not referring to "mobile phone devices". The biggest change in this regard, however, is that we have rephrased the first mandate. It does no longer say that network operators must refrain from adding surcharges for the first so-and-so many minutes and amount of megabytes, but rather it now requires that they do not add surcharges beyond the minimum transaction costs required to make connectivity and service provision technologically possible. In a way, some might say this is even more restrictive towards service providers, as the initial suggestion only limited their freedom to charge for a period of time, whereas we would like to see the new mandate being the case for the duration of a non-domestic users connection to the network. But we are willing to listen to other views and alternative solutions on that matter

Upon revisiting our draft, we realized that our primary ambition is perhaps to reduce the uncertainty and unpredictability for non-domestic users, rather than to absolutely get rid of all extra costs for a period of time. With the requirement that service providers must give notice on prices, and the elimination of potentially nefarious agreements overpricing service use (by capping surcharges levels), we feel like the latest draft meets our ambition.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude towards all contributing delegations, thank you.

In closing, I'd like to point out that the current draft has not taken into account the exchange between the ambassadors from Separatist Peoples and Jarish Inyo, which we have just now seen transcripts of. We will review these in detail later today."

Wilma sits down beside Thistle, he leans in and asks her

- "Good stuff, eh?"

- "Meh, could've been worse."

[Calladan]

So if I understand aright what I have read, you are requiring that - if I come to your fair country and attempt to phone my wife back home, I would be charged extra than if I phone her from down the street in Calladan, but no more than is necessary for whichever operator I am using to recoup the costs they are incurring to connect the call? And that they would have to tell me what the costs would be before the call is connected? (Or at least what the rate would be - they won't know the cost because they won't know how long I will stay on the phone!)

That seems fair.

I still think if I am connecting to the provider who holds my contract then any extra costs seem excessive and unwarranted, but this - for now - is an acceptable compromise, as I understand communicating over longer distances can be more expensive (on the same principle that calling long distance in my country is more expensive than calling a local number).

[Jarish Inyo]

Still not acceptable. A provider had the right to decide what it charges for its product that is being used by people not under contract to said provider. Again, the provider should not be penalized in any way for the stupidity of the one using a network outside of their coverage area. The provider does have to make a profit other then just breaking even. If they don't, then there is no incentive for them to provide services to non customers.

[Gnejs]

Still not acceptable. A provider had the right to decide what it charges for its product that is being used by people not under contract to said provider. Again, the provider should not be penalized in any way for the stupidity of the one using a network outside of their coverage area. The provider does have to make a profit other then just breaking even. If they don't, then there is no incentive for them to provide services to non customers.

Wilma looks at Nameless and whispers to Thistle

- "Quick, Thistle, say something clever about economics."

- "What are you talking about? I don't know anything about economics!"

- "I thought you were an economist, or whatever they're called."

- "What? No, I majored in Political Science; I'm basically useless."

- "Another disappointment, Thistle, you're really stacking 'em up; I only agreed to let you stay here because I thought you knew numbers and theory and whatnot. Didn't you work for the Minister of Finance at one point?"

- "Yes, writing speeches! The grey guys always filled in the numbers and reasoning afterwards."

- "Fine, I'll say something then."

Wilma stands, faces Nameless, stops to think, and finally replies

- "Ambassador Nameless, how nice to make your acquaintance in person. I'm sorry that this is not acceptable to you. Based on what you're saying, I'm afraid we probably won't reach a point where we're both happy. This is the "social justice" category, after all, and restricting economic freedoms are at the very core of such proposals.

Companies will have agreements regulating connection and service access across different nations. If you're a customer of a company, and they make agreements with another company allowing them to pick you up in their network when you arrive there, then I'd say that you're also a customer of the partner network, in a sense. The company in question is at least bound to the user by a contract with their main service provider.

And I do believe service providers will still have incentives to accommodate non-domestic users. If this was to pass, and company A decides to not do so, they'll find it impossible to make agreements with companies B and C in other countries allowing A's users service access there; these agreements most surely be reciprocal. In this situation, A's rival company will most likely take advantage and snatch away customers from A by being able to provide them not only with services at home, but also abroad through agreements with B and C. Seeing as A would be able to charge the expenses needed to facilitate an arrangement where B and C's users are given service access, I do not believe they would risk losing their customers by stopping non-domestic connection and service provision, effectively annulling all their agreements with providers in other nations.

Let me also say that I doubt many companies are completely reliant on the profits stemming from non-domestic service usage, although, of course, I do not doubt that they're a welcome addition. Unless, of course, their whole business plan is to allow foreigners access and then charging them insane amounts of money. That type of company might struggle, but I can live with that."

[Gnejs]

Wilma stands in the middle of the discussion chamber. Thistle gets on his feet and approaches her

- "Wilma, you've been standing there for over a week. He's probably not going to respond."

- "Uh, what? Oh. Hmm, maybe your right. Seems like we've fallen of the first page, in a manner of speaking."

She says while leaning against the chamber's fourth wall. Thistle escorts her back towards their seats, and asks

- "Wanna go to the bathroom or something? Cuppa?"

- "Bathroom first, cuppa for afterwards."

- "You know where it is, right?"

- "Yes, yes, next to ambassador Bell's office; I'll find it."

Wilma exits the chamber. Thistle looks over the collected transcript of the debate. He scratches his mustache, sits in silence for a moment, and then stands.

- "Honored ambassadors and delegation staff. I've come to realize that ambassador Wijk had some initial legality problems when she first presented her draft, category violation among other things.

If we could, only for a moment, look beyond whether or not we think this proposal is a good idea, and look at it from a purely legal standpoint. Let me ask, in your opinions, is this now a "legal" proposal, or are there still illegalities in there? Please bear in mind that we are an inexperienced delegation, and that we only wish to learn.

Also, we're now talking about wireless telecommunications networks. For the preamble that's probably sufficient, but do we need to offer a definition of these networks in the operative part?

Thank you for your time."

[States of Glory WA Office]

"Seems like we've fallen of the first page, in a manner of speaking."

She says while leaning against the chamber's fourth wall.

OOC: That joke was bad. So bad, in fact, that I couldn't help but chuckle at how bad it was.

[Gnejs]

*Wilma returns from the bathroom*

- «Thistle, I’m back!»

Thistle awakes from his hibernation - a method he learned while working as a press liaison for the Gnejsian Ministry of Agriculture - with a jolt.

- «You’re back. Splendid. Four months or so for getting to the bathroom and back isn’t too shabby. Your tea is ready, by the way, might’ve cooled a bit, but still good, I’d wager.»

- «This is a big place, Thistle, and I’m old, my bowel movements require time and dedication. Spare me your mockery and give me an update.»

- «You’ve missed nothing, besides Christmas and New Year’s and whatnot, but that was a fairly depressing seance in any case. Oh, yes, there’s a ‘secretariat’ now, handling legal questions and things like that.»

- «Why would I care about that, my proposal is as legal as they come.»

- «Yes, right, let’s just see about that.»

- «We need to regain some momentum, Thistle! I was expecting this to be at vote when I returned.»

Wilma grabs a microphone and starts shouting at no one in particular

- «This draft is once again active! Give me your worst, your poor and all your critical masses etc. etc.»

Wilma drops the mic.

Thistle picks up the mic.

- «Yes, hi everybody, apparently we’re reviving this, for some reason. Still interested in hearing thoughts on whether this fits within the assigned category. Thank you for your time, and apologies in advance.»

[Gnejs]

- "Thistle, I have submitted this to the board."

- What? No, you haven't?"

- "No, I haven't actually. But I will as soon as I figure out how."

- "I strongly advise you not to do that. I'm your advisor; listen to my advice."

- "Bah, like what?"

- "Increased welfare spending? Where do you fit that in, huh?"

Wilma scoffs, scribbles on a piece of paper, and hands it to Thistle.

- "There, tuck that on at the end; problem solved."

Thistle reads out loud

- "COMMISSIONS all member states to greet visitors from other WA member states, upon entry, with a piece of cake or quick-bread, preferably scones."

Thistle looks at Wilma in silence. She smiles smugly.

- "A proposal that decreases economic freedoms, and now also requires spending; got pay for them scones, n'est-ce pas?"

- "That's absurd. Whatever, submit it then. At least that way we'll get to see it in gothic print and get one of those fancy secretariat rulings.

- "I know, sweet, right?"

- "What's the campaign strategy?"

- "Don't be crude, Thistle. We're not soiling this noble proposal with the stench of populist campaigning."

- "No money huh?"

- "No."

- "Dead on arrival then?"

- "All part of the plan, Thistle, all part of the plan!"

Wilma laughs maniacally.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Heh, I actually looked at this yesterday (was looking for something else a few pages back) and was wondering if you were going to revive it.

The "publicly accessible" still makes this read as though it only referred to free WiFi and such freebie connections, because the phone companies' networks, wireless or otherwise, tend to be private, only usable for the subscribers of their services (or with right to use for other companies' subscribers being rented by the other companies themselves). At least that's the way it happens over here in RL. I don't know if other countries have different systems.

[States of Glory WA Office]

"COMMISSIONS all member states to greet visitors from other WA member states, upon entry, with a piece of cake or quick-bread, preferably scones."

Fairburn: 'Commissions' is a rather unusual verb in this context but apart from that, I do not see why this isn't an actual clause. Make Legislation Funny Again!

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: English does that sometimes (being Not Latin). Feature, not a bug.

OOC: Yes, but quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

OOC: Sed "videri" "esse" non est!

[snip]

"Ambassador, I can tell you that we basically support this proposal. We're like a short clarification, though. In your second active clause, the notice providers render to foreign network users shouldn't count against their data bill; customers should be able to decide if they want to pay connection costs before actually incurring them."

"I imagine we'll have further suggestions down the line, but that's it for now."

[Gnejs]

Fairburn: 'Commissions' is a rather unusual verb in this context but apart from that, I do not see why this isn't an actual clause. Make Legislation Funny Again!

Wilma gestures violently to Thistle while simultaneously pointing a finger at Fairburn.

- "See, Thistle, see! He gets it! Good man, good man. And of course it's an actual clause. I imagine Thistle will try to omit it, but I won't let him. Hmm, not a fan of 'COMMISSIONS', eh? I thought it had a nice ring to it, warm yet sinister. How about 'FORCES'? 'COMMANDS'? 'STRONG-ARMING'? I'm sure we'll think of something."
-

"Ambassador, I can tell you that we basically support this proposal. We're like a short clarification, though. In your second active clause, the notice providers render to foreign network users shouldn't count against their data bill; customers should be able to decide if they want to pay connection costs before actually incurring them."

"I imagine we'll have further suggestions down the line, but that's it for now."

Thistle stops chewing on his beard, puts on his most professional face, and addresses the Lyrical representative.

- "Thank you, both for your tentative support and input on our active clauses. That is a very good point that I can honestly say had not crossed our minds in the slightest. We will make sure to take note of that aspect upon revision. We look forward to any further suggestions you might have."

Thistle bows while backing away towards Wilma. He whispers to her.

- "Yeez, did you hear that Wilma? Somebody actually likes your proposal, kind of."

- "Perseverance, Thistle. If you keep at it for long enough, people are bound to come around eventually. That, and scones. People love scones."

- "Scones are pretty great, yeah."

OOC: Heh, I actually looked at this yesterday (was looking for something else a few pages back) and was wondering if you were going to revive it.

OOC: Yeah, I always post with the intention of actually ending this whole thing, and then I get preoccupied by other stuff or forget about it, since I don't check these forums very often. This time though, I'm sure to actually follow through with it. Hehe, that's the intention, at least.

The "publicly accessible" still makes this read as though it only referred to free WiFi and such freebie connections, because the phone companies' networks, wireless or otherwise, tend to be private, only usable for the subscribers of their services (or with right to use for other companies' subscribers being rented by the other companies themselves). At least that's the way it happens over here in RL. I don't know if other countries have different systems.

OOC: Yeah, I guess it kind of comes out that way. The idea was basically to restrict it to networks that, while undoubtedly 'private' in the way you describe, are accessible to the 'public', i.e. regular citizens, as opposed to closed government or company networks. Or something along those lines. Hah, such a hassle to just describe a regular mobile network.

[Gnejs]

Thistle sits at his desk, watching a potted plant shrivel. Suddenly, his computer makes a noise. Upon inspecting the screen, he reads:

Quarterlyish reminder: Revive Wilma's draft in the General Assembly!

He looks at his watch. "Oh my, has it been that long already? Indeed. I guess it's that time again."

He opens the door to his cupboard/office and climbs out. Wilma's asleep at her desk. He looks at the watch again. "Right, nap time," he says to himself. He retrieves a stack of paper and blows away the accumulated layers of dust. "I guess is doesn't matter if she's there or not anyway," he mumbles as he makes his way towards the debate chamber.

After navigating the WA-building for about three hours, he enters the chamber and taps the microphone.

"Hey folks, it's us again. Yes, we're still here, we just don't do much, heh. Yeah, anyways...

We actually made a couple of changes to that auld proposal of ours this time around

Following up on the input from the Lyrical delegation, notices about service prices now needs to be free of charge.

The lovely lady with the flamethrower suggested that "publicly accessible" networks sounded like free wifi or such similar setups, so we changed that to "commercially accessible to the public" Not sure that makes much difference, but we certainly hope so.

Anyways, that clause about forcing y'all to supply scones to visitors is now an actual part of the proposal. Wilma was very insistent on that. I did convince her to make supplementing the cake with a hot beverage optional though. So we're not saying that you have to do that, we're just saying it be nice, a kind gesture, you know.

So, that's it, basically. Thanks for your time!"

[Fauxia]

Hmmm, I don't know about this proposal...

[Gnejs]

Hmmm, I don't know about this proposal...

"More reasonable service charges, a complimentary snack when you disembark, and the possibility of a hot beverage.

What's not to like?"

[Laeral]

What is the current status of this proposal?

[Gnejs]

"Status? Eh.. Recurring joke, maybe? Heh..." Thistle laughs nervously and looks around the room.

"No, the status here is that we'll probably submit this to the board for review in a few days, a week maybe. Whenever the Gnejsian Ambassador wakes up from her nap, really. Nice to see the delegation from the IDU-delegacy around here."

[Gnejs]

"On orders from the ambassador, I've now submitted this to the GA Social Justice Board.

We look very much forward to what the secretariat's verdict will be. Since this is our first ever submission, we view it as a big accomplishment regardless. If it's ruled legal, we will view it as a great success and treat each and every member of all delegations to tea and scones.

Due to spending all our money on a massive amount of tea and scones - best to be prepared, after all - we will not mount a campaign. Participating is its own reward, as we say in the Prosaic Union."

[Laeral]

"I'm glad to hear it." said Su Yung-ming. "I'm just the Deputy Chief of Mission for the Laeralian WA delegation, but I'll try and pass it up the chain. Hopefully we'll be in a position to approve it and take it to a vote."

[Laeral]

This proposal has been submitted to the General Assembly. As of 11:52 on Saturday, September 9th, this has only 16 approvals. I don't think it's going to make it.

[Gnejs]

Thistle pushes a giant trolley towards the center of the room. He pauses and addresses the representative from Laeral.

"It likely won't make it, no. Alas, that is often the case with proposals that haven't been campaigned for, or so I'm told. However, I'm very pleased to say that the secretariat - or at least parts of it - has ruled our proposal legal according to the rules of this assembly. And you know what that means: Tea and scones for everybody!!

Who knows, maybe we'll use our next paycheck from back home to actually camping for this during a second submission round. That would arguably be a better way to spend our money. No regrets though, please help yourself from the trolley."