[PASSED] Repeal "Foreign Patent Act"

[Bakhton]

Lara Qzu adjusts her floppy hat authoritatively. "We will fight tooth and nail for our right to opt out of any patent treaty. This seems like another attempt for the international global market to try and force its ways on others."

Are there any further comments on this before I submit?

"... Can you, like... not?"

[Nilla Wayfarers]

The argument for that draft is not convincing enough to warrant this repeal.

"If protection of intellectual property rights is not convincing enough to warrant a repeal, I can't see why you would support the current resolution.

The sole purpose of the proposed replacement is to force all members to comply with the patent system currently in place. The argument that all member nations ought to comply with a patent system is not convincing, so I don't support this repeal. The target resolution is not as coercive, and I therefore prefer not to repeal it.

This is leaving aside that you originally challenged the Christian Democrat delegation for their support, and your challenge has been solidly answered."

It's been answered with an unsuitable replacement.

[Excidium Planetis]

The sole purpose of the proposed replacement is to force all members to comply with the patent system currently in place.

"Yes, that is quite the point. A patent system that can be ignored at will is useless. You may as well establish a copyright system but allow anyone to use copyrighted works for profit if they want to."

The argument that all member nations ought to comply with a patent system is not convincing, so I don't support this repeal.

"Then you should rightfully support the repeal. If nations do not need to comply with patents, we don't need a patent system, and thus should repeal the one we have."

It's been answered with an unsuitable replacement.

"You did not request a suitable replacement. You requested a replacement. Your challenge to the Christian Democrats was attempting to attack their pro-IP stance by pointing out that a repeal would reduce IP protection. That was answered with a replacement which firmly protects IP, and thus is quite suitable for the reason the Christian Democrats were arguing in favor. You can't then backpedal and pretend you weren't trying to make the Christian Democrats out to be hypocrites."

[Imperium Anglorum]

PARSONS: Blackbourne, I don't think you understand how logic and sense work in that country. Truths are discounted and denatured the second they enter. And arguments which don't meet the standard of supporting preheld beliefs are ignored. I distinctly remember a report coming over my desk telling me that they had recently defeated an army of straw men and scarecrows, but i don't know whether to trust it or not, the report itself mentioned that it was not but a rumour.

[Wallenburg]

The sole purpose of the proposed replacement is to force all members to comply with the patent system currently in place.

"Yes, that is quite the point. A patent system that can be ignored at will is useless. You may as well establish a copyright system but allow anyone to use copyrighted works for profit if they want to."

"Ambassador, I suggest you read my resolution before you continue with this repeal. No nation can ignore my resolution 'at will'. To 'ignore' it--and that's using a rather creative interpretation of 'ignore'--a nation would have to totally scrap its patent system."

The argument that all member nations ought to comply with a patent system is not convincing, so I don't support this repeal.

"Then you should rightfully support the repeal. If nations do not need to comply with patents, we don't need a patent system, and thus should repeal the one we have."

"Are you even trying to pretend that you are actually listening to that ambassador, Blackbourne? They said 'all nations'. All."

[Schnitzengrubenstein]

"How exactly might this perhaps favor certain types of patent systems over others? In many regards, it might not be conducive to economic activities of the developing member countries. It could also be seen as enforcing something with which should be more or less the assignment of specific specialized international organizations.

Are there not trade organizations and treaties which already call attention to these matters? And let us not forget that if something applies from to one specific country to another, then it could theoretically apply to all countries equally so that there is no "most-favored-nation", at least when it comes to tariffs alongside trade barriers and restrictions.

It is probably safe to say that patents could be under the umbrella of trade restrictions, and deserves to be properly addressed considering the economic and business implications such a resolution would have."

[Excidium Planetis]

"Yes, that is quite the point. A patent system that can be ignored at will is useless. You may as well establish a copyright system but allow anyone to use copyrighted works for profit if they want to."

"Ambassador, I suggest you read my resolution before you continue with this repeal. No nation can ignore my resolution 'at will'. To 'ignore' it--and that's using a rather creative interpretation of 'ignore'--a nation would have to totally scrap its patent system."

"Ambassador, Ogenbond, I did read your resolution, and argued against it thoroughly when it was being voted on.

"In short, yes, nations can ignore it at will. Nations wouldn't have to scrap anything at all if they had no patent system to begin with. And even if they did, it is no big loss to scrap patents in order to gain the ability to ignore the international patent system at will."

"Are you even trying to pretend that you are actually listening to that ambassador, Blackbourne? They said 'all nations'. All."

"Indeed. All nations. If all nations should not comply, then I don't see why we should have a patent system if all nations are in non-compliance with it. Let nations who want to subject themselves to a patent system form their own international pacts, we don't need the WA for anything less than a mandate to comply with a patent system."

[Wallenburg]

"Ambassador, Ogenbond, I did read your resolution, and argued against it thoroughly when it was being voted on.

"In short, yes, nations can ignore it at will. Nations wouldn't have to scrap anything at all if they had no patent system to begin with. And even if they did, it is no big loss to scrap patents in order to gain the ability to ignore the international patent system at will."

"Actually, it is. What they gain in their ability to disregard foreign patents they lose in that their citizens cannot protect their innovations at the national level. Of course, that may just be my perspective as a citizen of a nation with a very strong patent system. If your nation has no concern for intellectual property, that is none of my concern."

"Are you even trying to pretend that you are actually listening to that ambassador, Blackbourne? They said 'all nations'. All."

"Indeed. All nations. If all nations should not comply, then I don't see why we should have a patent system if all nations are in non-compliance with it. Let nations who want to subject themselves to a patent system form their own international pacts, we don't need the WA for anything less than a mandate to comply with a patent system."

"Ambassador, if you wish to play the idiot, you are more than welcome to do so in the Strangers' Bar."

[Excidium Planetis]

"Actually, it is. What they gain in their ability to disregard foreign patents they lose in that their citizens cannot protect their innovations at the national level. Of course, that may just be my perspective as a citizen of a nation with a very strong patent system. If your nation has no concern for intellectual property, that is none of my concern."

"And would you care to point out exactly where in your resolution nations are prevented from protecting innovations on the national level without a patent system?"

[Wallenburg]

"Actually, it is. What they gain in their ability to disregard foreign patents they lose in that their citizens cannot protect their innovations at the national level. Of course, that may just be my perspective as a citizen of a nation with a very strong patent system. If your nation has no concern for intellectual property, that is none of my concern."

"And would you care to point out exactly where in your resolution nations are prevented from protecting innovations on the national level without a patent system?"

"You must be joking me. Please, Ambassador, explain to me how individuals can patent their inventions if there is no patent system at all."

[Excidium Planetis]

"And would you care to point out exactly where in your resolution nations are prevented from protecting innovations on the national level without a patent system?"

"You must be joking me. Please, Ambassador, explain to me how individuals can patent their inventions if there is no patent system at all."

"They don't need to patent their inventions. Patents are not the only method of intellectual property protection, Ambassador Ogenbond. What you have done, however, is admit that your resolution does not actually prohibit nations from protecting their citizens's IP at a national level, but merely requires them to lack a patent system, if they wish to ignore the international patents.

"I will go further, actually. Your resolution does not even prohibit nations from protecting their citizens' IP in foreign nations. It cannot!"

[Wallenburg]

"They don't need to patent their inventions. Patents are not the only method of intellectual property protection, Ambassador Ogenbond. What you have done, however, is admit that your resolution does not actually prohibit nations from protecting their citizens's IP at a national level, but merely requires them to lack a patent system, if they wish to ignore the international patents.

"Are you really going to make that argument? If so, your entire basis for supporting this repeal shoots itself in the head. You have quite consistently insisted that 'Foreign Patent Act' jeopardizes protection of intellectual property at an international scale. That directly conflicts with this new claim."

"I will go further, actually. Your resolution does not even prohibit nations from protecting their citizens' IP in foreign nations. It cannot!"

"Ambassador, if I have to explain the concept of national jurisdiction to you as if you are a grade school child, I will send you right out the nearest window."

[Bakhton]

"They don't need to patent their inventions. Patents are not the only method of intellectual property protection, Ambassador Ogenbond. What you have done, however, is admit that your resolution does not actually prohibit nations from protecting their citizens's IP at a national level, but merely requires them to lack a patent system, if they wish to ignore the international patents.

"I will go further, actually. Your resolution does not even prohibit nations from protecting their citizens' IP in foreign nations. It cannot!"

"It appears cogent to still ask the question as to why a government like our own which does not recognize patents and has a government controlled economy, which does actually reimburse foreign artists for their work, should be forced to acknowledge a system of commerce completely foreign to them?"

[Excidium Planetis]

"They don't need to patent their inventions. Patents are not the only method of intellectual property protection, Ambassador Ogenbond. What you have done, however, is admit that your resolution does not actually prohibit nations from protecting their citizens's IP at a national level, but merely requires them to lack a patent system, if they wish to ignore the international patents.

"Are you really going to make that argument? If so, your entire basis for supporting this repeal shoots itself in the head. You have quite consistently insisted that 'Foreign Patent Act' jeopardizes protection of intellectual property at an international scale. That directly conflicts with this new claim."

"Ambassador Ogenbond, please understand. My wish is to repeal your resolution precisely because it allows nations to protect their own intellectual property in their nation through non-patent systems while stealing other nations' intellectual property and profiting off of it outside of the originating nations. Those nations which are being stolen from, yes, can protect their IP in their own nation, but are hard pressed to protect it in foreign markets, save in regards to very specific works. The replacement, I hope, will force nations to adopt patent systems and protect certain IP with that means exclusively, and recognize foreign patents. That is no conflict."

"I will go further, actually. Your resolution does not even prohibit nations from protecting their citizens' IP in foreign nations. It cannot!"

"Ambassador, if I have to explain the concept of national jurisdiction to you as if you are a grade school child, I will send you right out the nearest window."

Blackbourne snaps out a combat knife, and quickly pins his right boot to the floor. "International Law trumps national jurisdiction, Ambassador Ogenbond. International Law allows nations to protect their citizens' IP in foreign nations."

"It appears cogent to still ask the question as to why a government like our own which does not recognize patents and has a government controlled economy, which does actually reimburse foreign artists for their work, should be forced to acknowledge a system of commerce completely foreign to them?"

"Intellectual property is not a system of commerce. Commerce is the act of buying or selling, and neither are strictly necessary for patents. One can patent to protect the exclusive manufacture and even use of the patented item."

[Auralia]

OOC: Ought be changed to something like "Observing that this leaves inventors with substantial risks and few rewards, thus significantly reducing the incentive to pay for the research and development necessary for innovation". The reason why patents work is not because innovators would not have innovated without them, it is because they would never have gotten the funds to innovate without patents.

I think both are true, actually, so I'll add your proposed language as well. A lack of a patent system has a chilling effect on both inventors and their investors.

Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly

[States of Glory WA Office]

Fairburn: I see that this has been submitted. These petty repeals are doing my head in. Against.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This resolution is now at vote.

[Separatist Peoples]

"For. Property rights, even narrow ones, have far too little attention in the World Assembly. Letting nations opt out of what there are would be disastrous. And think of all the out-of-work patent attorneys! Won't somebody think of the lawyers!?"

[Sierra Lyricalia]

"Against. If nations want to hobble themselves charging rent for established industries and incentivizing technology oligopoly, that's their business; we prefer to protect true innovators and small entrepreneurs, and the target resolution makes doing even that hard enough. Not a chance in hell we'll support the intended replacement."

[Auralia]

"Against. If nations want to hobble themselves charging rent for established industries and incentivizing technology oligopoly, that's their business; we prefer to protect true innovators and small entrepreneurs, and the target resolution makes doing even that hard enough. Not a chance in hell we'll support the intended replacement."

That's your call, but I don't really understand why you think the replacement is so much worse than Foreign Patent Recognition, which you supported.

Martin Russell
Chief Ambassador, Auralian Mission to the World Assembly

[Imperium Anglorum]

That's your call, but I don't really understand why you think the replacement is so much worse than Foreign Patent Recognition, which you supported.

OOC: They could have changed their opinion with new evidence, such as that provided displayed in the extremely interesting article they linked. However, I don't think that the article negates the idea of patents entirely, just the idea of patents as long as they currently are in the United States.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

That's your call, but I don't really understand why you think the replacement is so much worse than Foreign Patent Recognition, which you supported.

OOC: They could have changed their opinion with new evidence, such as that provided displayed in the extremely interesting article they linked. However, I don't think that the article negates the idea of patents entirely, just the idea of patents as long as they currently are in the United States.

OOC: This, basically. The free market anti-capitalist society Steph and Leo inhabit would rather abolish patents entirely than have the current US system or its pre-Uruguay Round predecessor. The universal ten-year term explicitly allowed by FPR, and my own personal then-ignorance of the issue, made the FPR regime swallowable IC. I'm not up to retconning it, so I'm rolling with the term length being the biggest deal-breaker.

[Crito]

I urge all nations to vote AGAINST Repeal "Foreign Patent Act".

The current act, rightly and properly, respects national sovereignty. We are unlikely to get another agreement that will not do so. We will simply find ourselves voting to repeal whatever new agreement they come up with in short order. The current act provides a framework for cooperation between signatories. Repealing this act without immediate replacement could be economically dangerous as the anarchy in the intermittent period could upset international trade.

[Chameliya]

The Chámelíyálí Delegation to the World Assembly votes AGAINST this resolution. It is the view of Chámelíyá that GA#388 is not only suitable legislation for the important issue of intellectual property, but crucially is also a resolution that treads the line of WA member states' sovereignty adroitly. It is also the view of Chámelíyá that this proposal misrepresents GA#388 and seeks to solve a problem that this delegation believes to be at worst, negligible. Although Chámelíyá believes that the delegation from Auralia has noble intentions in the submitting of this proposal, it cannot vote in favour of repealing GA#388 and that dispensing with such would be a retrograde step for this body.

[Christian Democrats]

For. Property rights, even narrow ones, have far too little attention in the World Assembly.

We agree with Separatist Peoples, and our delegation has voted in favor of this proposal.