NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Prohibition Of Unwarranted Digital Surveillance

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Fri Jun 04, 2021 4:29 pm

"I have changed my approach to the definitions substantially to adhere to some advice I received outside of this Chamber. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated."

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2977
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:12 pm

"We are opposed. This is the internet equivalent of preventing a nation's security services from looking out the window and effectively prevents them from using the internet. Requiring a warrant to use a search engine or to pick up any of the information that people freely leave about themselves all over the internet, EG IP addresses, social media posts, etc. The far more devastating part of this effective ban is how it would prevent monitoring of dark web criminals and paedophiles. Just how can police get a warrant before they have collected any evidence that a crime has been committed?"
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.
Ideological Bulwark #281
THIS

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:31 am

Bananaistan wrote:"We are opposed. This is the internet equivalent of preventing a nation's security services from looking out the window and effectively prevents them from using the internet. Requiring a warrant to use a search engine or to pick up any of the information that people freely leave about themselves all over the internet, EG IP addresses, social media posts, etc. The far more devastating part of this effective ban is how it would prevent monitoring of dark web criminals and paedophiles. Just how can police get a warrant before they have collected any evidence that a crime has been committed?"

"I failed to add the word 'private' in my definition of digital surveillance. That has been rectified. Thus, that should alleviate concerns about the search engine conundrum. As for your later point about dark web criminals and pedophiles, it should be noted that a substantial amount of such illicit digital communications occur in the public sphere. That is, much of the content pertaining to the illlcit firearms, drugs, counterfeiting, child abuse, forging industries, etc. can be found through dark web search engines. Law enforcement may then have suspicion that offenses are being committed. Then, a warrant can be issued."
Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:58 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65824
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:59 am

Against. This would hamper Thermodolia’s entire state security apparatus
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:22 am

Thermodolia wrote:Against. This would hamper Thermodolia’s entire state security apparatus

IC: "Alas, this resolution is intended to limit such intrusive security apparatuses."

User avatar
Great Algerstonia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 852
Founded: Mar 21, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby Great Algerstonia » Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:25 am

Thermodolia wrote:Against. This would hamper Thermodolia’s entire state security apparatus

"Agreed, state surveillance is imperative to catching enemies of the state. If this resolution were to pass, Algerstonia will become far more unstable, goddamnit."

~Admiral-Ambassador Alec Ainsworth, while sadly wondering if this will be the last week he gets to fly his custom surveillance drone.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:32 am

Great Algerstonia wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:Against. This would hamper Thermodolia’s entire state security apparatus

"Agreed, state surveillance is imperative to catching enemies of the state. If this resolution were to pass, Algerstonia will become far more unstable, goddamnit."

~Admiral-Ambassador Alec Ainsworth, while sadly wondering if this will be the last week he gets to fly his custom surveillance drone.

McCooley smirks. "Admiral-Ambassador, I've heard about those drones you fly over in Algerstonia. Nifty things. Well, if you want to be able to use them in the event that this draft of mine becomes international legislation, you can always get a warrant and perform necessary surveillance that way."


User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6604
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:03 pm

“You should have a comma after ‘categorisation’ and before ‘and’ in clause 3a. Other than that, I have no objections to this. Unless any are raised, this legislation will have my full support.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:07 pm

Kenmoria wrote:“You should have a comma after ‘categorisation’ and before ‘and’ in clause 3a. Other than that, I have no objections to this. Unless any are raised, this legislation will have my full support.”

"Interestingly enough, I have been advised by the delegation from Imperium Anglorum that such a comma is unnecessary."

OOC: Since those clauses comprise a two-piece list, a comma between them wouldn't be necessary.
Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6604
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:12 pm

Greater Cesnica wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:“You should have a comma after ‘categorisation’ and before ‘and’ in clause 3a. Other than that, I have no objections to this. Unless any are raised, this legislation will have my full support.”

"Interestingly enough, I have been advised by the delegation from Imperium Anglorum that such a comma is unnecessary."

OOC: Since those clauses comprise a two-piece list, a comma between them wouldn't be necessary.

(OOC: I always like to put commas in long two-items lists for clarity, but you are correct that there is no actual grammatical need. Consider that objection withdrawn.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
The Provincial Union of the Pacific
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Mar 25, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Provincial Union of the Pacific » Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:14 pm

Is this outright banning public surveillance too? The use of cameras in public areas often lead to the apprehension and even acquittal for the accused.

I've seen surveillance used in good and bad ways, the good outnumber the bad for me so I can't support something like this. The biggest example of good is their use in catching criminals either in the act or fleeing from it and also if someone says they were, for example; at the bank and could not have committed the crime and the cameras show that they were, in fact, at the bank at the time it happened then that proves their innocence. I understand you said CCTV would be exempt but there are examples in not-so-private areas.

A major disadvantage of surveillance, however, is its use against people in totalitarian regimes where any word against the government is considered treason. For matters like this I can agree that surveillance may need to be limited a bit but not completely banned.
Posted by the
Department of the Sovereign State
of the
Provincial Union of the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans

H.H.M. Alexander / H.V.M. Grace
King and Queen of the Provincial Union
M.A. Alice N. Crawford
President of the Provincial Union
Dr. Victor V. Larsen, First Minister / M.A. Thomas E. Lutz, Minister Chief / Ms. Safiya L. Nazari, Principal-in-Chief
All international inquiries will be handled by the Department of the Sovereign State

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:17 pm

The Provincial Union of the Pacific wrote:Is this outright banning public surveillance too? The use of cameras in public areas often lead to the apprehension and even acquittal for the accused.

I've seen surveillance used in good and bad ways, the good outnumber the bad for me so I can't support something like this. The biggest example of good is their use in catching criminals either in the act or fleeing from it and also if someone says they were, for example; at the bank and could not have committed the crime and the cameras show that they were, in fact, at the bank at the time it happened then that proves their innocence. I understand you said CCTV would be exempt but there are examples in not-so-private areas.

A major disadvantage of surveillance, however, is its use against people in totalitarian regimes where any word against the government is considered treason. For matters like this I can agree that surveillance may need to be limited a bit but not completely banned.

"Cameras at banks would not be operated by member states, I would presume. And the other instances are covered by the publically accessible exemption."

User avatar
Daarwyrth
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1644
Founded: Jul 05, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Daarwyrth » Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:21 pm

Dame Maria vyn Nysem, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "Our delegation recognises the growth of this proposal draft as feedback and time moved forward. The current version of the proposal is in a state where our delegation as well as the Royal State would be able to support it. The question of necessity regarding the international scale of the WA does flare up in the back of my mind, as this isn't necessarily an international issue. Nonetheless, our delegation is willing to accept and support this effort, as it has a good intent and in our opinion applies that intent reasonably to a workable proposal. I will advise my Queen to move to a vote 'for' when this reaches the floor."
Last edited by Daarwyrth on Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Royal State of Daarwyrth

Current year: 2021 CE | Leader: Queen Demi Maria I | Capital: Daarsted | Government type: Unitary semi-constitutional monarchy | Technology level: Post-modern tech
List of Authored Writings | Factbook on Daarwyrth | Factbook on Queen Demi Maria I | Royal House of Zylkoven | WA Representatives | Political Parties | Diplomatic Programme
Played nations
  • Daarwyrth
  • Cape Blackcat
  • Summerforest
  • Independent Democratic Socialist States
Who am I?
  • 25 years old male
  • Dutch and Polish
  • English literature major
  • Ex-religious gay leftist

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:56 pm

Daarwyrth wrote:Dame Maria vyn Nysem, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "Our delegation recognises the growth of this proposal draft as feedback and time moved forward. The current version of the proposal is in a state where our delegation as well as the Royal State would be able to support it. The question of necessity regarding the international scale of the WA does flare up in the back of my mind, as this isn't necessarily an international issue. Nonetheless, our delegation is willing to accept and support this effort, as it has a good intent and in our opinion applies that intent reasonably to a workable proposal. I will advise my Queen to move to a vote 'for' when this reaches the floor."

"Thank you very much, Ambassador vyn Nysem."

OOC: Restricted foreign digital surveillance gathering to foreign government entities and/or entities that actively pose a threat to national security. The same time frame for submission applies.
Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15713
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:19 am

OOC: A question: would a monitoring program on a state-issued piece of electronics (like laptop) given to someone who works for the state, be allowed, if the monitoring program's presence is known to the person using the device and they have signed an agreement saying they know it's there and are fine to have it there?

In my understanding most "work machines" by state workers who have access to privileged information, contain such programs in RL and even with the fairly tight privacy regs of the EU nations, they are perfectly legal.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Coronavirus related. This too. And this. These are all jokes. This isn't. This is, again, but it's also the last one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:23 am

Araraukar wrote:OOC: A question: would a monitoring program on a state-issued piece of electronics (like laptop) given to someone who works for the state, be allowed, if the monitoring program's presence is known to the person using the device and they have signed an agreement saying they know it's there and are fine to have it there?

OOC: Yes.

User avatar
Herby
Diplomat
 
Posts: 884
Founded: Jul 13, 2014
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Herby » Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:18 pm

Ehhhhh hang on a minute bub. The way this written it seems that it would prevent us from recording incoming telephone calls. Am I wrong? Phone calls certainly aren’t public.
-- Ambassador #53. From the nation of Herby. But you can call me Herby.

Herby's doors and windows are ALWAYS locked when she's in the Strangers' Bar (unless she unlocks them for you). And, she has no accelerator, a mock steering wheel, and no gear shifter. So, no joyrides.

User avatar
Beta Cyndriel
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Beta Cyndriel » Wed Jun 09, 2021 12:42 am

We find ourselves opposed.

The precise wording of Section 2c is broad enough to exclude incidental data or evidence discovered on secondary sources such as social media, streaming, public broadcasts, and so on from use in legal judgements or national security, on the grounds that it was "not originally gathered for those purposes".

For the Tricameral, D. Makepeace, Regent

User avatar
The Hazar Amisnery
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 53
Founded: Oct 26, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby The Hazar Amisnery » Wed Jun 09, 2021 1:09 am

What about using digital surveillance for public surveillance? Its safer and easier than having police officers roaming the streets. Its not an invasion of privacy if its in public places. This WA is making the world all happy and gooey and when an actual crisis occurs no one will be able to do anything because its illegal
President of The European Commowealth of Nations
My bad conlang
Leader: Dimitry Tereshkova
Royals: King Augustus Arzumanyan and Queen Sarah Arzumanyan
Choego Appa: Fabrice Yale-Geul-Liteu-Ingan
Eagle News Network:
BREAKING NEWS: SOCHINCORP QUESTIONED AFTER 6 UN MILITARY CORPSES WASH UP ON AMROTS AP'Y BEACH| RURAL SWIMMING TEAM GETTING PREPEARED FOR TOKYO OLYMPICS| GEORGIAN EXPAT MURDERED, POLICE SAY POSSIBLE ASSASINATION|BIGGEST STORM IN 10 YEARS HITS SOUTHWEST|5G EXPECTED TO BE RELEASED IN MAJOR CITIES NEXT YEAR

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Wed Jun 09, 2021 3:35 am

Beta Cyndriel wrote:We find ourselves opposed.

The precise wording of Section 2c is broad enough to exclude incidental data or evidence discovered on secondary sources such as social media, streaming, public broadcasts, and so on from use in legal judgements or national security, on the grounds that it was "not originally gathered for those purposes".

For the Tricameral, D. Makepeace, Regent

"Such use is possible with a warrant. Furthermore, there is nothing stopping the government from performing warrantless surveillance of such public mediums if it is for spying or prosecutorial purposes."

User avatar
Laka Strolistandiler
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1566
Founded: Jul 14, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Laka Strolistandiler » Wed Jun 09, 2021 3:38 am

Obraztsova: Opposed on basis that it would hamper Lakan Internal Intelligence Ministry operations especially in wartime. Furthermore search engine limitation seem a bit too absurd...
*whispering* God, please, don’t let this pass, I don’t want to be disposed off...
Last edited by Laka Strolistandiler on Wed Jun 09, 2021 3:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
For: Cultural Nationalism, Enlightened Dictatorship, Authoritarianism, Pro-Life, Computer-Controlled Command Economy, Collectivism, Machiavellism, National Communism,Zionism, Total Equality of Sexes, Stoicism, Altruism, Russian Imperialism, Internet Piracy, Nuclear Energy and Weapons
Mixed: Freedom of Speech, Animal Rights, Populism, Democracy, Total War, Environmentalism, Racism
Against: Neoliberalism, Privacy, Republicanism, Secularism, Capitalism, Abortion, LGBTQ+, Critical Racial Theory, Individualism, Internationalism, Sunni Islam, Zionism, Personal Privacy and Rights

The most based half-black Russian you’re ever going to see in your whole life.
Pride? [REDACTED]
RIP Borderlands of Rojava. Unjustly DOS’d for alleged sins on June 21st, 2021.
#FreeNSGRojava
someModerators lie.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Wed Jun 09, 2021 3:39 am

Herby wrote:Ehhhhh hang on a minute bub. The way this written it seems that it would prevent us from recording incoming telephone calls. Am I wrong? Phone calls certainly aren’t public.

"Phone calls in what context, exactly? Because if you're insinuating that warrantless wiretapping should somehow be legal broadly, this resolution was crafted specifically with that practice in mind and expanded out further from there."

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7650
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Wed Jun 09, 2021 3:40 am

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:Obraztsova: Opposed on basis that it would hamper Lakan Internal Intelligence Ministry operations especially in wartime. Furthermore search engine limitation seem a bit too absurd...
*whispering* God, please, don’t let this pass, I don’t want to be disposed off...

"How does this limit search engine usage?"

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Imperium Anglorum

Advertisement

Remove ads