[PASSED] Data Protection Accord

[Uan aa Boa]

1. Adolescents are not defined as minors in this proposal, they are users.

According to 1b anyone under the age of majority is a minor, and 1e specifically states that these adolescents are minors. 2a therefore applies to them. They can't have a login that requires a website to hold data personal such as an email address without the consent of a guardian.

2. Use a warrant

You can't. WA law trumps national law and your proposal forbids the police from accessing that data. That can't be countermanded by a local warrant.

[Marxist Germany]

1. Adolescents are not defined as minors in this proposal, they are users.

According to 1b anyone under the age of majority is a minor, and 1e specifically states that these adolescents are minors. 2a therefore applies to them. They can't have a login that requires a website to hold data personal such as an email address without the consent of a guardian.

OOC: 1b says "a person under the age of majority", due to it not specifying "every", one can argue that 1e would trump 1b in such case.

2. Use a warrant

You can't. WA law trumps national law and your proposal forbids the police from accessing that data. That can't be countermanded by a local warrant.

An organisation could say that it would share data with the government when necessary or whatever as this falls under one of the exceptions. There isn't really a way around this without specifying every single scenario which is excepted.

[Uan aa Boa]

OOC: 1b says "a person under the age of majority", due to it not specifying "every", one can argue that 1e would trump 1b in such case.

Does 1a mean that all entities that systematically collect data count as "organisations" or just some of them? Does 1d mean that all data that identifies an individual count as "personal data" or just some of it? If these definitions are to produce a workable law then you have to read 1b in the same way - any person under the age of majority is a minor.

1e would only trump that if it were impossible to be both a user and a minor, but in fact 1e clearly states the opposite, that minors in this vaguely defined transition are also users.

An organisation could say that it would share data with the government when necessary or whatever as this falls under one of the exceptions.

It could say that, but your proposal gives the government no way of insisting if the company involved didn't want to cooperate or hadn't built the necessary user content into its terms and conditions. This isn't an unrealistic scenario as Apple recently did something similar in real life.

There isn't really a way around this without specifying every single scenario which is excepted.

That's not much help when the proposal has serious negative effects.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I concur with Uan aa Boa, it appears that under this proposal, MG would not be permitted to use Facebook.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: Well...Uhh..This...Is less than optimal.... I guess I will have to withdraw this...

Edit: On a positive note, this missed qourum by one approval in the most recent update, So at least this didnt get defeated at vote and quite possibly poisoned the well

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: So, here we go again, issues solved, and submission will be tomorrow after the minor.

[Ransium]

Pro-tip: If someone finds a major hole in your proposal (or several of them) the thing to do is not to duct tape it and resubmit immediately. It a major red light flashing signal to slow down. I’m honestly a little surprised your still able to make quorum, if you actually want to pass this take a few months to let delegates you just got defeated and you just withdrew a proposal that had reached quorum.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: This is true, I forgot about the whole slowing down thing, I'll keep this on hold for a couple of weeks and instead focus on another proposal.

[Marxist Germany]

"I have expanded upon section 2 of the proposal with the addition of clauses 2e, feedback will be appreciated. I feel like 2e should be divided into two separate clauses."

[Kenmoria]

"I have expanded upon section 2 of the proposal with the addition of clauses 2e, feedback will be appreciated. I feel like 2e should be divided into two separate clauses."

“Clause 2e currently doesn’t make complete sense. For example, a business wanting to receive data needs the consent of the business sending data, which surely must already exist given that the data is being sent. Splitting into separate clauses would be a good idea.”

[Marxist Germany]

"I have expanded upon section 2 of the proposal with the addition of clauses 2e, feedback will be appreciated. I feel like 2e should be divided into two separate clauses."

“Clause 2e currently doesn’t make complete sense. For example, a business wanting to receive data needs the consent of the business sending data, which surely must already exist given that the data is being sent. Splitting into separate clauses would be a good idea.”

"I have gone ahead and made that changed. It is up for review."

[Kenmoria]

“Clause 2e currently doesn’t make complete sense. For example, a business wanting to receive data needs the consent of the business sending data, which surely must already exist given that the data is being sent. Splitting into separate clauses would be a good idea.”

"I have gone ahead and made that changed. It is up for review."

“With what is now 2e, I don’t see what a business is supposed to do about receiving data. If it is emailed to them then there’s no reasonable way for them to not receive it. Perhaps you could mandate that they don’t store data without user consent, or something similar?”

[Marxist Germany]

"I have gone ahead and made that changed. It is up for review."

“With what is now 2e, I don’t see what a business is supposed to do about receiving data. If it is emailed to them then there’s no reasonable way for them to not receive it. Perhaps you could mandate that they don’t store data without user consent, or something similar?”

"Yes, that should now be fixed."

[Uan aa Boa]

Your definitions remain nonsensical. This is firstly because all children, even babies, are going through a transitional period into adulthood - it's called childhood. Your definition of a minor singles out nobody. Secondly, you want your categories of minors and users to be mutually exclusive, but then you continue to define "minors who..." to be users. The problem there is that having tried to give the word minor a specific definition for the purposes of this proposal that's different to what it normally means (because you want to exclude adolescents) you're then continuing to use it in its common everyday sense. It's not a good idea for one proposal to use the same word to mean two different things.

I understand that you're trying to replicate the thing where you can have a Facebook account at 13, but that opposition to arbitrary numbers and RP species-wank mean that you can't specify an age. You need to actually spell out your solution to that problem, however, not just vaguely wave in its general direction.

[Marxist Germany]

Your definitions remain nonsensical. This is firstly because all children, even babies, are going through a transitional period into adulthood - it's called childhood. Your definition of a minor singles out nobody. Secondly, you want your categories of minors and users to be mutually exclusive, but then you continue to define "minors who..." to be users. The problem there is that having tried to give the word minor a specific definition for the purposes of this proposal that's different to what it normally means (because you want to exclude adolescents) you're then continuing to use it in its common everyday sense. It's not a good idea for one proposal to use the same word to mean two different things.

I understand that you're trying to replicate the thing where you can have a Facebook account at 13, but that opposition to arbitrary numbers and RP species-wank mean that you can't specify an age. You need to actually spell out your solution to that problem, however, not just vaguely wave in its general direction.

OOC: I understand your concerns, the problem is that I really cant define adolescence more specifically than it currently is, which is why I added "as defined by member states".

[Giant Bats]

Ikiti, the ambassador of the Tikrr, was half-dozing on her perch, when a thought occurred to her. "Would not it make the most sense for the proposal to allow the nations themselves decide the age limits required for the proposal to work? For a data agreement the organization gathering the data could then just remind the user that it is up to them, not the organization, to obey their national law on the matter."

Well, honestly, what she said was much simpler than that, but her translator program was smart enough to know what she had referred to, and translated accordingly.

[Ashlea]

This should be amended to allow that police can continue to be recording in their interactions to keep them held accountable.

[Kenmoria]

This should be amended to allow that police can continue to be recording in their interactions to keep them held accountable.

(OOC: It already does that, since police recording would fall under ‘prevention of crime’, which is an explicit exception.)

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: Bumping this for more feedback, if nothing is added within this next week I will submit on Sunday 13th October. LAST CALL!

[Youssath]

Your definitions remain nonsensical. This is firstly because all children, even babies, are going through a transitional period into adulthood - it's called childhood. Your definition of a minor singles out nobody. Secondly, you want your categories of minors and users to be mutually exclusive, but then you continue to define "minors who..." to be users. The problem there is that having tried to give the word minor a specific definition for the purposes of this proposal that's different to what it normally means (because you want to exclude adolescents) you're then continuing to use it in its common everyday sense. It's not a good idea for one proposal to use the same word to mean two different things.

I understand that you're trying to replicate the thing where you can have a Facebook account at 13, but that opposition to arbitrary numbers and RP species-wank mean that you can't specify an age. You need to actually spell out your solution to that problem, however, not just vaguely wave in its general direction.

"If the Boani Ambassador can give the German Ambassador a moment of consideration, I can assure him that it will be worth it in the end."

"Regarding the poor definitions brought up by the Boani Ambassador, I believe that the ambassador has been mistaken in his facts. All children, even babies, when they go past the stage of childhood, will reach adolescence. This is the correct stage that marks the true transition from puberty to adulthood. To call a baby or even a preschooler, as a matter of fact, to be transiting towards adulthood would be a ridiculous assumption to make in the first place. The question of a minor as "a person under the age of majority" should, therefore, be left up to member states to determine, and we believe that it is not in the best interests of the member state and the WA to determine and micromanage something that cannot be influenced easily such as human biology (puberty happens to us at different ages, are we going to set numbers to determine maturity?). Therefore, this delegation does not agree with the points brought up by the Boani Ambassador."

"While we do stand committed in our stance for this proposal, we cannot help but feel disturbed over Clause 2(a), which explicitly states,

Prohibits Organisations from collecting or storing the personal data of any minor without the explicit consent of their guardian except when the guardian cannot be contacted or it is not in the best interests of the minor to do so, as determined by national governments, or the business is unable to verify the age of the user;

This clause, when interpreted independently by itself, can give the following interpretations.

Organizations are not allowed to collect or store the personal data of any minor without the explicit consent of their guardian, except:

1. when the guardian cannot be contacted;
2. it is not in the best interests of the minor to do so, as determined by national governments; and
3. the business is unable to verify the age of the user.

"As shown here, the definition and scenarios granted where "the guardian cannot be contacted" is too vague, and it gives rise to the issue where organizations can collect or store personal data of any minor, if the guardian cannot be contacted at the pleasure of the timing from the organization. Furthermore, no written notices or correspondence is required to be given to the guardian by this resolution, which while the burden of proof rests upon the organization, it provides a "loophole" for organizations to exploit on, especially to the most vulnerable population of a nation - the children. Therefore, we ask that the term "and" replace the conflicting wording in order to ensure mandatory correspondence with the guardian, and if you would like, to also require a written notice - be it a note or a receipt, anything that can at least display accountability - to ensure that the guardian has indeed been contacted upon and have not given their response back to the organization."

"Of course, you can choose to refuse our suggestion as well, and we will still be voting for this resolution. This delegation believes that this is just an extra piece of legislation on the table and that we will add on top of your own if this does not pass."

[Marxist Germany]

"As shown here, the definition and scenarios granted where "the guardian cannot be contacted" is too vague, and it gives rise to the issue where organizations can collect or store personal data of any minor, if the guardian cannot be contacted at the pleasure of the timing from the organization. Furthermore, no written notices or correspondence is required to be given to the guardian by this resolution, which while the burden of proof rests upon the organization, it provides a "loophole" for organizations to exploit on, especially to the most vulnerable population of a nation - the children. Therefore, we ask that the term "and" replace the conflicting wording in order to ensure mandatory correspondence with the guardian, and if you would like, to also require a written notice - be it a note or a receipt, anything that can at least display accountability - to ensure that the guardian has indeed been contacted upon and have not given their response back to the organization."

"Of course, you can choose to refuse our suggestion as well, and we will still be voting for this resolution. This delegation believes that this is just an extra piece of legislation on the table and that we will add on top of your own if this does not pass."

"Thank you for the suggestion, ambassador, this was an unintended effect and will be fixed shortly. "

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: Submission in 4 days.Uan aa Boa, this is the time for important suggestions and criticisms, because it is very inconvenient when it has been submitted and campaigned for, and even at vote.

[WayNeacTia]

OOC: Submission in 4 days.Uan aa Boa, this is the time for important suggestions and criticisms, because it is very inconvenient when it has been submitted and campaigned for, and even at vote.

What exactly is the hurry with this? Flaws have been identified, and keep popping up shortly before you submit. Perhaps you should let it cool for a while.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: Submission in 4 days.Uan aa Boa, this is the time for important suggestions and criticisms, because it is very inconvenient when it has been submitted and campaigned for, and even at vote.

What exactly is the hurry with this? Flaws have been identified, and keep popping up shortly before you submit. Perhaps you should let it cool for a while.

OOC: It has been up for over 2 weeks with no feedback

[Bananaistan]

OOC: Tbf Uan aa Boa has already stated that the definitions are nonsensical and your response appears to be no more than "bruh?"

I'd also add that the definition of personal data means that the scope of the entire proposal is incredibly narrow.

Previous advice was to go off and research GDPR. Have you done this?