[DRAFT] Open Internet Order

[Bakhton]

"Well, almost all previously passed resolutions share this format, or a majority do anyway. How's that for a precedent?"

Do they? I'd be most interested to see a resolution that includes an argument as to why the resolution's subject is within the proper scope of international law.

"That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is standard format structure, at least I think." Lara sends for her typist for the transcript of the recent debate.

[Aclion]

Do they? I'd be most interested to see a resolution that includes an argument as to why the resolution's subject is within the proper scope of international law.

"That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is standard format structure, at least I think." Lara sends for her typist for the transcript of the recent debate.

The conventional format is just that, a convention. It's by no means binding.

[Bakhton]

"That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is standard format structure, at least I think." Lara sends for her typist for the transcript of the recent debate.

The conventional format is just that, a convention. It's by no means binding.

"That's fine but out of the last fifty resolutions passed by this assembly only about one has a non-standard preamble, #369. Conforming to the established style may lend legitimacy to the proposal, if subconscious. It's optional, of course."

[Imperium Anglorum]

The conventional format is just that, a convention. It's by no means binding.

"That's fine but out of the last fifty resolutions passed by this assembly only about one has a non-standard preamble, #369. Conforming to the established style may lend legitimacy to the proposal, if subconscious. It's optional, of course."

How is this non-standard?

[Bakhton]

"That's fine but out of the last fifty resolutions passed by this assembly only about one has a non-standard preamble, #369. Conforming to the established style may lend legitimacy to the proposal, if subconscious. It's optional, of course."

How is this non-standard?

"The preamble is one line, which is significantly shorter than most."

[Imperium Anglorum]

But there are clearly two lines.

[Bakhton]

But there are clearly two lines.

Lara doubletakes between the record of what she said and what's written in the proposal. "Oh right... well the point still stands."

[Aclion]

But there are clearly two lines.

Lara doubletakes between the record of what she said and what's written in the proposal. "Oh right... well the point still stands."

"what point?"

[Tinhampton]

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly: The point that nearly all resolutions have similar preambles to each other.

[Thailand Special Administrative Region]

So...there's an argument just because I'm including a "longer preamble"?

[Tinfect]

So...there's an argument just because I'm including a "longer preamble"?

OOC:
For the record, it's because you're breaking format. A wall of text like that doesn't really fit in with other resolutions, and there's miles of precedent for doing it the usual way.
And the actual, real life United Nations does it quite similarly. So, there's good reason we do it here.

[Thailand Special Administrative Region]

*snip*

What's wrong with a "longer preamble"? Other than I'm "breaking format".

[Tinfect]

*snip*

What's wrong with a "longer preamble"? Other than I'm "breaking format".

OOC:
The argument about Preamble Length is, first of all, about shorter than usual Preambles, and second, doesn't pertain to your draft. Tangential discussions sometimes pop up in these threads, ask them to take it to TG, and that will hopefully be the end of it.

[Araraukar]

The current draft seems to forbid porn websites requiring subscription to see the whole content, as well as keeping any information private via the use of passwords. Also I wonder how exactly this would promote free press? The area of effect sounds wrong for something like this.

[Imperium Anglorum]

The current draft seems to forbid porn websites requiring subscription to see the whole content, as well as keeping any information private via the use of passwords. Also I wonder how exactly this would promote free press? The area of effect sounds wrong for something like this.

Websites are not Internet service providers.

[Separatist Peoples]

The current draft seems to forbid porn websites requiring subscription to see the whole content, as well as keeping any information private via the use of passwords. Also I wonder how exactly this would promote free press? The area of effect sounds wrong for something like this.

Websites are not Internet service providers.

"Then your nation is missing out on the best porn websites."

[Araraukar]

The current draft seems to forbid porn websites requiring subscription to see the whole content, as well as keeping any information private via the use of passwords. Also I wonder how exactly this would promote free press? The area of effect sounds wrong for something like this.

Websites are not Internet service providers.

The companies or, indeed, governmental agencies that own and upkeep them, when providing "other related services" on the internet, however are, according to the definition.

OOC: RL example: I can log into the public healthcare system's website to check my digital prescriptions and bloodworks results and such. In that instance the healthcare system is the service provider, since it provides a service over the internet. The definition is badly worded.

[Imperium Anglorum]

The companies or, indeed, governmental agencies that own and upkeep them, when providing "other related services" on the internet, however are, according to the definition. OOC: RL example: I can log into the public healthcare system's website to check my digital prescriptions and bloodworks results and such. In that instance the healthcare system is the service provider, since it provides a service over the internet. The definition is badly worded.

The Oxford Dictionary of English says that an Internet service provider is a company that provides subscribers with access to the Internet. When the proposal says 'other related services', I don't interpret that as meaning 'literally anything related to the Internet', I interpret that as 'services related to the provision of Internet access'. Your healthcare system doesn't provide a service related to the provision of Internet access, and therefore, isn't an ISP.

[Araraukar]

*snip*

OOC: The definition is badly worded.

[Imperium Anglorum]

When the proposal says 'other related services', I don't interpret that as meaning 'literally anything related to the Internet', I interpret that as 'services related to the provision of Internet access'. Your healthcare system doesn't provide a service related to the provision of Internet access, and therefore, isn't an ISP.

OOC: The definition is badly worded.

When the proposal says 'other related services', I don't interpret that as meaning 'literally anything related to the Internet', I interpret that as 'services related to the provision of Internet access'. Your healthcare system doesn't provide a service related to the provision of Internet access, and therefore, isn't an ISP.

[Calladan]

When the proposal says 'other related services', I don't interpret that as meaning 'literally anything related to the Internet', I interpret that as 'services related to the provision of Internet access'. Your healthcare system doesn't provide a service related to the provision of Internet access, and therefore, isn't an ISP.

I have to side with Imperium Anglorum here - the Calladan government provides a plethora of websites relating to our services, but we do not actually provide the ability to access these sites. The government is NOT an ISP, despite having several dozens websites and subdomains and a few domains to our name.

[Thailand Special Administrative Region]

*snip*

*snip*

*snip*

To address Araraukar concerns... This resolution's intent is to treat all content equal. Also, I will be adding a clause that allows subscription-based entity's (that operate over the internet) to restrict access if payments are required.

[Imperium Anglorum]

This resolution's intent is to treat all content equally. Also, I will be adding a clause that allows subscription-based entity's entities (that operate over the internet) to restrict access if payments are required.

There's no need to add such a clause. Do not write some overarching clause then carve out exceptions. Zero in on a specific action which you find unacceptable and then deal with it. If you want content to be treated some certain way, write that. The solution to your issue is to rewrite your definitions clause or your prohibits clause.

Also, there is no need use bolding or italicisation in your proposal. Furthermore, the word 'Internet' should be capitalised (although its genericisation proceeds). You don't need a summary section, the text of the proposal ought be that summary, as it shouldn't be too long. And the reason why people use prefatory clauses is to argue the reasons for why some action ought be taken. This bolsters the case for your proposal. You should do this as well.

[Thailand Special Administrative Region]

*snip*

Revised Resolution

Open Internet Order

---

| Category: Education & Free Press | Area of Affect: Free Press | Proposed By: Thailand Special Administrative Region |

Summary: Open Internet Order further promotes freedom of expression, freedom of speech & free press by building upon existing resolutions that directly and/or indirectly promote each given example and by relying on multiple resolutions for authority. This Open Internet Order will:

Define the following:

• "Internet Service Provider" as any entity that provides anyone access to the internet.
• "Reasonable Network Management" allows Internet Service Providers to throttle access to lawful content on the basis of: avoiding network congestion (Demand vs Resources) and contractual obligations (Depending on the service plan).
• "Lawful" allowed by international law and/or national law (If international law and national law conflict, the Internet Service Provider may use their implied discretionary powers and choose which law to give preference)

Prohibit Internet Service Providers from:

• Blocking, throttling and restricting access to lawful content;
• Prioritizing any content on the basis of receiving payments (monetary or otherwise)

Permit Internet Service Providers to employ, reasonable network management controls.

Clarify that Internet Service Providers still have jurisdiction over their pricing structure and reiterates that is Open Internet Order doesn't require Internet Service Providers to expand their network.

[Araraukar]

You need to write the verbs as "Defines", "Prohibits", "Permits", "Clarifies". And kill the "summary", write it out as a normal preamble and start the whole thing with "The World Assembly" to appease certain people ready to get you in trouble over such a trivial detail. (OOC: And while I heartily support your choice to both bold and italicize the verbs at the start of the clauses, certain people will automatically hate your proposal just because of that.)