[PASSED] Int'l Radio Standards Act

[Sedgistan]

International Radio Standards Act
Category: Regulation
AoE: Safety

The World Assembly,

Recognising that radio technology is used by many member states for communication,

Lamenting the lack of international standards for radio communication,

Considering the detrimental effects that a lack of standards has on international radio communication, such as incompatibilities in equipment,

Especially worried that a lack of international cooperation could result in non-coordination and even interference in essential radio communications,

Aware that sudden regulatory changes are likely to cause severe confusion in existing radio transmissions,

Hereby enacts as follows:

1. International Radiocommunications Authority: There shall be an International Radiocommunications Authority (IRA), which shall be an organ of the WA Scientific Programme.
2. Radio spectrum allocations: For each member state using radio for communication, the IRA shall allocate parts of the radio spectrum for each relevant kind of communication in that state, which shall include at least public broadcasting and recreational use. The allocations shall be made considering the existing use in that state and other nearby states, in order to increase compatibility of standards between nations while minimising inconvenience to existing radio transmission. Member states shall be required to comply with these allocations after a reasonable transition period fixed by the IRA. The allocations may be changed from time to time by consultation between the IRA and member states.
3. Registry of radio transmitters: Member states shall maintain a registry, revised frequently, of all persons or institutions equipped to transmit radio signals which can be recieved over long distances, and shall allocate frequencies to each of them if necessary to avoid interference of signals. Member states shall submit this registry to the IRA regularly. Member states shall make freely available all portions of the registry for which doing so would not unduly infringe on privacy or national security.
4. Restrictions on equipment:
   1. Member states may:
      1. Prohibit or restrict the manufacture, sale or purchase of equipment capable of transmitting radio signals outside the ranges allocated for public broadcasting and recreational use,
      2. Require that equipment capable of transmitting radio signals, other than equipment solely for private communication on frequencies specified for that purpose (such as mobile telephones) only be sold to persons licensed to operate such equipment, provided such licensing is widely available without unreasonable costs or restrictions,
      3. Prohibit or restrict the manufacture, sale or purchase of equipment capable of receiving radio signals in any ranges allocated for secret military or security communication, or
      4. Prohibit the transmission of radio signals at a power which is likely to injure or kill any sentient beings living in that area, except in a contained environment for scientific research.
   2. Member states may not impose unreasonable restrictions on the manufacture, sale or purchase of equipment for transmitting or receiving radio signals which are not covered by article 4a.

Feedback welcome. This is my first attempt at a WA proposal, and I don't know too much about the topic either, so please take it easy. I need a category as well.

[Honeydewistania]

I think this could fit into either Free Trade | Mild or Regulation | Something, depending on the angle you take with it

[East Blepia]

Member states may not impose unreasonable restrictions on the manufacture, sale or purchase of equipment for transmitting or receiving radio signals which are not covered by article 4.

Would the jamming of politically inconvenient signals be considered 'unreasonable'?

[Merni]

Member states may not impose unreasonable restrictions on the manufacture, sale or purchase of equipment for transmitting or receiving radio signals which are not covered by article 4.

Would the jamming of politically inconvenient signals be considered 'unreasonable'?

I expect that would be illegal under article 3 of 436 GA Protecting Free Expression.
Edit: In any case the article you quote only deals with the equipment, not the signals themselves. ( might fix that in a later draft)

[Honeydewistania]

"Line breaks in the preamble would be appreciated, it reads a bit clunky."

[Merni]

I think this could fit into either Free Trade | Mild or Regulation | Something, depending on the angle you take with it

None of the Regulation AoEs seem very pertinent here. The Ideas thread (from where I got the idea) says Regulation/Safety, but my proposal has only one clause that I think of as "Safety" (4.a.iv).

"Line breaks in the preamble would be appreciated, it reads a bit clunky."

Done.

[Honeydewistania]

I guess uniform standards increase free trade, so that’s your best option for now. If I’m wrong, someone please correct me.

[Merni]

I guess uniform standards increase free trade, so that’s your best option for now. If I’m wrong, someone please correct me.

I'm provisionally adding that in, but I'd like some more feedback from other regulars to confirm it.

[Kenmoria]

“Clause 3 seems technologically challenging for a lot of member states, if a lot of people have access to long-range radio transmissions. In a very large state, this could be changing on an almost daily basis, necessitating near-constant censuses to keep track of thousands of data points.”

[Merni]

“Clause 3 seems technologically challenging for a lot of member states, if a lot of people have access to long-range radio transmissions. In a very large state, this could be changing on an almost daily basis, necessitating near-constant censuses to keep track of thousands of data points.”

Added the words "revised reasonably frequently", which should take care of that.

[Araraukar]

OOC: A couple of general questions...

1. What's the general point of this? As in, why is this something the WA should meddle with? Do note that I'm NOT saying "not an international issue", but rather "why should WA do something about it"? Especially given that it's almost impossible for MT nations to not already have some international agreemeents on such, at least with their neighbours.

2. Are telecommunications using radio signals (cellphones and smartphones, for example, as well as wireless internet technology) included?

3. How about GPS?

EDIT: 4. And given you're placing helluva lot of restrictions in place, or at least giving nations the right to restrict the use of such tech and items to only to people they like, and making the WA the literal Big Brother Surveillance Hell, how the fuck is this Free Trade?

[Merni]

Before responding, I just want to note that this is only an initial draft,

OOC: A couple of general questions...

1. What's the general point of this? As in, why is this something the WA should meddle with? Do note that I'm NOT saying "not an international issue", but rather "why should WA do something about it"? Especially given that it's almost impossible for MT nations to not already have some international agreemeents on such, at least with their neighbours.

The IRA is a system for better cooperation between members on this issue than can be done with simple agreements with neighbours -- conceivably it could result in some harmonisation and better documentation of different countries' spectrum usage, at least among countries that are able to communicate with each other (say, on the same planet). I also won't deny that I got the idea from the Ideas sticky, but then that's what it's for!

2. Are telecommunications using radio signals (cellphones and smartphones, for example, as well as wireless internet technology) included?

3. How about GPS?

Insofar as both these use radio signals, yes, they are included for the purposes of clause 2. Of course, mobile phones and wi-fi aren't capable of sending signals that can be received over substantially long distances, so clause 3 wouldn't apply. I do agree that clauses 4(a)(i) and (ii) may need exceptions for these things though -- I'll have to think of suitable wording for that.

EDIT: 4. And given you're placing helluva lot of restrictions in place, or at least giving nations the right to restrict the use of such tech and items to only to people they like, and making the WA the literal Big Brother Surveillance Hell, how the fuck is this Free Trade?

I'm not sure about that either; it was Honeydewistan who suggested it should be Free Trade, and I didn't have any better idea, so I put it in. If you have any better category this could fit in, feel free to suggest it rather than cursing and exaggerating. Also, please tell me where I'm "giving nations the right to restrict the use of such tech and items to only to people they like" or "making the WA the literal Big Brother Surveillance Hell". Let me give you my intent behind each subdivision of clause 4a:
i. People transmitting signals on frequencies used for ATC, emergency services coordination, police, military etc. could be really harmful. I might change this to be limited to cases such as the above, if I can figure out how to phrase it.
ii. This is actually pretty common and I don't understand how it could be confused for surveillance.
iii. People spying on military communications is generally not a good idea (even though they are almost always coded). But if y'all think this should be removed, then fine.
iv. Seems completely unobjectionable.

[Merni]

Bump. I've been rather busy over the last month or so, but I would like to get back to drafting this.
Edit: Added a somewhat clumsy exception for mobile phones and the like in 4(a)(ii).

[Honeydewistania]

Considering the detrimental effects that a lack of standards has on international radio communication,

"It would be good to list one of these" snickers Rekeil. His boss showed up sick this morning, and he’s in a good mood, as he’s in charge of the delegation now. "Your preamble doesn’t describe any actually consequence of unregulated radio communication, and I believe there is enough character count to include a few reasons."

He continues. "I’d drop the ‘reasonably’ in the third clause. It adds an unnecessary level of ambiguity, and ‘frequently’ is good enough on its own."

OOC: lol at calling the organ the IRA. Not bad, just amusing.

[Bananaistan]

Considering the detrimental effects that a lack of standards has on international radio communication,

"It would be good to list one of these" snickers Rekeil. His boss showed up sick this morning, and he’s in a good mood, as he’s in charge of the delegation now. "Your preamble doesn’t describe any actually consequence of unregulated radio communication, and I believe there is enough character count to include a few reasons."

He continues. "I’d drop the ‘reasonably’ in the third clause. It adds an unnecessary level of ambiguity, and ‘frequently’ is good enough on its own."

OOC: lol at calling the organ the IRA. Not bad, just amusing.

OOC: The Provisional International Radiocommunications Authority would be better.

[Ikheria]

"It would be good to list one of these" snickers Rekeil. His boss showed up sick this morning, and he’s in a good mood, as he’s in charge of the delegation now. "Your preamble doesn’t describe any actually consequence of unregulated radio communication, and I believe there is enough character count to include a few reasons."

He continues. "I’d drop the ‘reasonably’ in the third clause. It adds an unnecessary level of ambiguity, and ‘frequently’ is good enough on its own."

OOC: lol at calling the organ the IRA. Not bad, just amusing.

OOC: The Provisional International Radiocommunications Authority would be better.

OOC: More lol
IC: "I think its change our radio communication technology whom we already have its our standard version; "Wireless DTIS Application Suites" (WDAS). This also change our satellite systems."

[Merni]

All OOC.

Considering the detrimental effects that a lack of standards has on international radio communication,

"It would be good to list one of these" snickers Rekeil. His boss showed up sick this morning, and he’s in a good mood, as he’s in charge of the delegation now. "Your preamble doesn’t describe any actually consequence of unregulated radio communication, and I believe there is enough character count to include a few reasons."

Once I can figure out some good wording, I will.

He continues. "I’d drop the ‘reasonably’ in the third clause. It adds an unnecessary level of ambiguity, and ‘frequently’ is good enough on its own."

I guess so. Will do.

IC: "I think its change our radio communication technology whom we already have its our standard version; "Wireless DTIS Application Suites" (WDAS). This also change our satellite systems."

Please explain how.

[Merni]

OOC:
Re-bumping. Per Honeydewistania's suggestion, I added two (admittedly quite weak) reasons to the "Considering" clause.

This still needs a category. The only thing I can think of is Regulation/Safety, and that's a really poor fit.

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC: The Provisional International Radiocommunications Authority would be better.

Not to start a sectarian conflict, but next someone is going to come up and propose some name like Radio in Ultra-high-frequencies Commission.

[Merni]

If there's nothing more said, I will try to submit this in about two weeks.

Edit: Under Regulation/Safety unless someone can point out a better category.

[Honeydewistania]

"If you do Regulation | Safety, could you try writing your preamble to fit the category a little more?"

[Merni]

"If you do Regulation | Safety, could you try writing your preamble to fit the category a little more?"

OOC: Well, I added one clause that perhaps helps. I really can't think of anything more to write atm.

[Honeydewistania]

"If you do Regulation | Safety, could you try writing your preamble to fit the category a little more?"

OOC: Well, I added one clause that perhaps helps. I really can't think of anything more to write atm.

You should submit to the GA for a legality check first (and not campaign), to see if its legal

[Merni]

OOC: Well, I added one clause that perhaps helps. I really can't think of anything more to write atm.

You should submit to the GA for a legality check first (and not campaign), to see if its legal

I don't know, that sounds like gaming the system and creating extra work for GenSec to me I'll see about it later.

[Honeydewistania]

You should submit to the GA for a legality check first (and not campaign), to see if its legal

I don't know, that sounds like gaming the system and creating extra work for GenSec to me I'll see about it later.

The only person whose work is wasted would be you if you campaign and find out it's illegal so best to play it safe