[DEFEATED] Interference-Causing Equipment Standards Act

[Greater Cesnica]

Proposal Link: https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vi ... 1584297811

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free electronic communications, especially in relation to the use of personal digital devices,

Aware that signal leakage and other badly contained electromagnetic emissions may damage critical infrastructure such as transportation and network systems,

Cognizant that improperly shielded devices may malfunction badly enough to inflict catastrophic damage upon such systems and networks, and

Seeking to define standards for digital devices which may interfere with other devices, in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to such interference,

Hereby:

1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,
   2. Electronic communications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information, in the form of electromagnetic waves, to initiate technological functions remotely or to enable direct communication between two or more electronic transmitters or receivers, and
   3. An interference-causing device as a device that causes, or is capable of causing, interference to electronic communications,
2. Enacts the following provisions regarding interfering-causing devices and electronic communication devices:
   
   1. Interference-causing devices emitting a given frequency must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value,
   2. Interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,
   3. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels which can damage them or inhibit their use must be sufficiently shielded against such excessive levels of interference, and
   4. All digital devices covered under the provisions of this resolution must be sufficiently shielded against potential excessive levels of interference from interference-causing devices,
3. Forbids the import, export, and distribution of interference-causing devices that violate Article 2 within and between member states,
4. Prohibits the usage of such non-compliant devices, where they are neither:
   
   1. Intended for use by member state military, law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, or scientific research projects and organizations that have the approval of the state they operate in, nor
   2. "Denial-of-service devices," or devices intended to prevent cellular and wireless network communication in public settings, when deployed by any entity and authorized for use by the state that said entity operates in, and
5. Encourages member states to establish further technical standards for digital devices in the spirit of this resolution.

Co-authored by Tinhampton

[Greater Cesnica]

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment as being Class A interference-causing devices.
  
• Interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment as being Class B interference-causing devices.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a given field intensity value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 66 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 5 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 56 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 5 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 60 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 79 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 73 dBμV.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a given field intensity value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 66 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 5 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 56 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 5 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 60 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 79 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 73 dBμV.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Further directs that any consumers, organizations, and/or corporations that are adversely affected by electronic devices or equipment that violate the guidelines established in this resolution be eligible to receive monetary compensation if such compensation is required in order to offset personal or financial losses.

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a given field intensity value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Reasons that Class A and B interference-causing devices must not exceed these limits for the following reasons: if the current of electromagnetic noise exceeds a certain 'field limit' (magnetic shielding against emissions spreading outside the device) for a corresponding megahertz value, then there will be the potential for adverse electromagnetic interference.
  
• Further reasons that all interference-causing devices that exceed the 'field limit (electromagnetic field containing frequency emissions higher than what the device is using) have the potential to cause adverse electromagnetic interference.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Further directs that any consumers, organizations, and/or corporations that are adversely affected by electronic devices or equipment that violate the guidelines established in this resolution be eligible to receive monetary compensation if such compensation is required in order to offset personal or financial losses.

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Elaborates that interference-causing devices producing radio-emissions in a given megahertz range must not produce electromagnetic noise emissions sufficient enough to cause the electromagnetic field of the device's emission to adversely interfere with other devices and/or machinery.
  
• Reasons that Class A and B interference-causing devices must not exceed these limits for the following reasons: if the current of electromagnetic noise exceeds a certain 'field limit' (magnetic shielding against emissions spreading outside the device) for a corresponding megahertz value, then there will be the potential for adverse electromagnetic interference.
  
• Further reasons that all interference-causing devices that exceed the 'field limit (electromagnetic field containing frequency emissions higher than what the device is using) have the potential to cause adverse electromagnetic interference.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Further directs that any consumers, organizations, and/or corporations that are adversely affected by electronic devices or equipment that violate the guidelines established in this resolution be eligible to receive monetary compensation if such compensation is required in order to offset personal or financial losses.

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Elaborates that interference-causing devices producing radio-emissions in a given megahertz range must not produce electromagnetic noise emissions sufficient enough to cause the electromagnetic field of the device's emission to adversely interfere with other devices and/or machinery.
  
• Reasons that Class A and B interference-causing devices must not exceed these limits for the following reasons: if the emission of electromagnetic noise exceeds the electromagnetic shielding (measures against emissions spreading outside the device) for a corresponding megahertz value, then there will be the potential for adverse electromagnetic interference.
  
• Further reasons that all interference-causing devices that exceed a device's electromagnetic shielding measures have the potential to cause adverse electromagnetic interference by exposing outside devices or machinery to electromagnetic fields capable of damaging or inhibiting the usage and/or functionality of effected equipment.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Further directs that any consumers, organizations, and/or corporations that are adversely affected by electronic devices or equipment that violate the guidelines established in this resolution be eligible to receive monetary compensation if such compensation is required in order to offset personal or financial losses.

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications for the use of digital devices so prevalent in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Cognizant that devices that are not properly shielded against such emissions may malfunction in such a manner that catastrophic damage may be inflicted upon the aforementioned systems and networks utilized by our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define standards to which such digital devices shall be held in compliance with,

Hereby,

1. Defines in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

i. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,

ii. Radiocommunications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers,

iii. Interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use, as machinery or equipment that causes or is capable of causing interference to radiocommunications,

iv. Class A interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use in a residential environment,

v. Class B interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential civilian use.

2. Standardizing conformity for interfering-causing devices and radiocommunication devices as:

i. Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV; for if these values exceed this field strength value, there will be excess emissions and leakage of electromagnetic emissions, which may lead to adverse operation of similar digital devices,

ii. Requires that interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,

iii. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels capable of damaging the affected devices or inhibiting their use,

3. Directs that interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed within and between member states,

4. Prohibits the usage of such violating devices and/or apparatuses under any circumstances,

5. Exempts from the provisions of this resolution any device intended for use by the armed forces or law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and scientific research projects and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in,

6. Further exempts entities authorized by the state they operate in using so-called "denial-of-service" devices used in public settings to prevent cellular and wireless network communications,

7. Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and develop guidelines for electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications for the use of digital devices so prevalent in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Cognizant that devices that are not properly shielded against such emissions may malfunction in such a manner that catastrophic damage may be inflicted upon the aforementioned systems and networks utilized by our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define standards to which such digital devices shall be held in compliance with,

Hereby,

1. Defines in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

i. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,

ii. Radiocommunications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers,

iii. Interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use, as machinery or equipment that causes or is capable of causing interference to radiocommunications,

iv. Class A interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use in a residential environment,

v. Class B interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended for non-residential civilian use,

2. Standardizing conformity for interfering-causing devices and radiocommunication devices as:

i. Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV; for if these values exceed this field strength value, there will be excess emissions and leakage of electromagnetic emissions, which may lead to adverse operation of similar digital devices,

ii. Requires that interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,

iii. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels capable of damaging the affected devices or inhibiting their use must be sufficiently shielded to prevent excessive levels of interference,

iv. All electronic devices covered under the provisions of this resolution must be sufficiently shielded to guard against potential excessive levels of interference from Class A and B devices,

3. Directs that interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed within and between member states,

4. Prohibits the usage of such violating devices and/or apparatuses except where exempted,

5. Exempts from the provisions of this resolution any device intended for use by the armed forces or law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and scientific research projects and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in,

6. Further exempts entities authorized by the state they operate in using so-called "denial-of-service" devices used in public settings to prevent cellular and wireless network communications,

7. Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and develop guidelines for electronic devices,

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications for the use of digital devices so prevalent in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Cognizant that devices that are not properly shielded against such emissions may malfunction in such a manner that catastrophic damage may be inflicted upon the aforementioned systems and networks utilized by our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define standards to which such digital devices shall be held in compliance with,

Hereby,

1. Defines in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

i. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,

ii. Radiocommunications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers,

iii. Interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use, as machinery or equipment that causes or is capable of causing interference to radiocommunications,

iv. Class A interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use in a residential environment,

v. Class B interference-causing devices as interference-causing equipment intended for non-residential civilian use,

vi. Further clarifying that Class A interference-causing devices tend to require less shielding and guarding against electromagnetic emissions and interference than Class B interference-causing devices,

2. Standardizing conformity for interfering-causing devices and radiocommunication devices as:

i. Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV; for if these values exceed this field strength value, there will be excess emissions and leakage of electromagnetic emissions, which may lead to adverse operation of similar digital devices,

ii. Requires that interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,

iii. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels capable of damaging the affected devices or inhibiting their use must be sufficiently shielded to prevent excessive levels of interference,

iv. All electronic devices covered under the provisions of this resolution must be sufficiently shielded to guard against potential excessive levels of interference from Class A and B devices,

3. Directs that interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed within and between member states,

4. Prohibits the usage of such violating devices and/or apparatuses except where exempted,

5. Exempts from the provisions of this resolution any device intended for use by the armed forces or law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and scientific research projects and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in,

6. Further exempts entities authorized by the state they operate in using so-called "denial-of-service" devices used in public settings to prevent cellular and wireless network communications,

7. Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and develop guidelines for electronic devices,

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications for the use of digital devices so prevalent in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Cognizant that devices that are not properly shielded against such emissions may malfunction in such a manner that catastrophic damage may be inflicted upon the aforementioned systems and networks utilized by our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

Seeking to define standards to which such digital devices shall be held in compliance with,

Hereby,

1. Defines in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

i. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,

ii. Radiocommunications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers,

iii. Interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use, as machinery or equipment that causes or is capable of causing interference to radiocommunications,

2. Standardizing conformity for interfering-causing devices and radiocommunication devices as:

i. Interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV; for if these values exceed this field strength value, there will be excess emissions and leakage of electromagnetic emissions, which may lead to adverse operation of similar digital devices,

ii. Requires that interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,

iii. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels capable of damaging the affected devices or inhibiting their use must be sufficiently shielded to prevent excessive levels of interference,

iv. All electronic devices covered under the provisions of this resolution must be sufficiently shielded to guard against potential excessive levels of interference from interference-causing devices,

3. Directs that interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed within and between member states,

4. Prohibits the usage of such violating devices and/or apparatuses except where exempted,

5. Exempts from the provisions of this resolution any device intended for use by the armed forces or law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and scientific research projects and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in,

6. Further exempts entities authorized by the state they operate in using so-called "denial-of-service" devices used in public settings to prevent cellular and wireless network communications,

7. Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and develop guidelines for electronic devices,

---

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Safety |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications, especially in relation to the use of certain digital devices which are now so highly prevalent as to be almost ubiquitous,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses which fail to properly contain radiocommunication emissions that may be used by digital devices may damage infrastructure that is critically important to our society, such as transportation systems and network systems,

Cognizant that devices that are not properly shielded against these emissions may malfunction badly enough to inflict catastrophic damage upon such systems and networks, and

Seeking to define standards for digital devices which may interfere with other devices to comply with, in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to such interference,

Hereby:

1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information,
   2. Radiocommunications as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information, in the form of electromagnetic waves, to initiate technological functions remotely or to enable direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers, and
   3. An interference-causing device as a device that causes, or is capable of causing, interference to radiocommunications,
2. Enacts the following provisions regarding interfering-causing devices and radiocommunication devices:
   
   1. Interference-causing devices emitting a given frequency, expressed in megahertz MHz, must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (since excess emissions and leakage of electromagnetic emissions, which may lead to adverse operation of similar digital devices, will result if this field strength value is exceeded),
   2. Interference-causing devices must not significantly interfere with radiocommunications of digital devices or essential machinery,
   3. All interference-causing devices that have the potential to expose other devices or machinery to interference levels which can damage them or inhibit their use must be sufficiently shielded against such excessive levels of interference, and
   4. All digital devices covered under the provisions of this resolution must be sufficiently shielded against potential excessive levels of interference from interference-causing devices,
3. Forbids the importation, exportation, and distribution of interference-causing devices that violate Article 2 within and between member states,
4. Prohibits the usage of such violating devices, where they are neither:
   
   1. Intended for use by the military, law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and scientific research projects and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in, nor
   2. "Denial-of-service devices," or devices intended to prevent cellular and wireless network communication in public settings, when deployed by any entity and authorized for use by the state that said entity operates in, and
5. Encourages member states to establish further technical standards for digital devices in the spirit of this resolution.

Co-authored by Tinhampton

[Morover]

OOC:

| Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection |

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

• A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process or send digital information.
  
• Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.
  
• Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication, that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communication.
  
• Interference-causing equipment intended for use in a residential environment as being Class A interference-causing devices.
  
• Interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment as being Class B interference-causing devices.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

• Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a given field intensity value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 66 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 5 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 56 dBμV.
  
• Class A interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 5 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 60 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.15 to 0.50 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 79 dBμV.
  
• Class B interference-causing devices in the frequency range of 0.50 to 30 MHz must not exceed a quasi-peak reading of 73 dBμV.

Directs that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

Exempts the provisions of this resolution from any technology, device, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces, police agencies, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or organizations of member states,

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

I won't pretend to be an expert on this subject, so I'm not really going to comment on a lot of the aspects of this draft. Hell, I don't even know if the general premise of the draft is suitable for the WA to legislate on. I'll let those more informed give opinions on the broader subject matter.

In your definition of "digital device," you seem to be lacking the case of "create digital information." I don't know how prevalent it is to the proposal, but it's worth putting in there, since it almost certainly can't hurt anything.

In your definitions for "class-A interference-causing-devices" and "class-B interference-causing-devices," put the word you're defining in the beginning of the subclause. And, while you're at it, put what you're defining in quotation marks for better clarity for all your definitions.

Is "hertz" a real-life reference? It's an SI-Unit, and without further definition, I don't know if it can be asserted to already be established in the NationStates world. Maybe something to look into.

If you don't mind me suggesting it, number your clauses. I'm super guilty of not doing it, but that last clause of yours threw me off.

That's all I have to say for now. Hopefully you can make some sense of what I said, because I know it's not overly clear.

[Bears Armed]

OOC: Is "hertz" a real-life reference? It's an SI-Unit, and without further definition, I don't know if it can be asserted to already be established in the NationStates world. Maybe something to look into.

OOC
RL units are okay, as long as (a) they're reasonably "standard" ones (fitting within the 'understandable English') rule, and (b) if they're named after RL people then their names have been formally established as names for units (rather than as personal references) and thus normally take lower-case first letters. "hertz" is therefore 'legally' acceptable, in the correct context, just like ""centimeters" or "grams", feet" or "pounds". [one-sixth of GenSec]

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: Is "hertz" a real-life reference? It's an SI-Unit, and without further definition, I don't know if it can be asserted to already be established in the NationStates world. Maybe something to look into.

OOC
RL units are okay, as long as (a) they're reasonably "standard" ones (fitting within the 'understandable English') rule, and (b) if they're named after RL people then their names have been formally established as names for units (rather than as personal references) and thus normally take lower-case first letters. "hertz" is therefore 'legally' acceptable, in the correct context, just like ""centimeters" or "grams", feet" or "pounds". [one-sixth of GenSec]

2/6.

I do want to ask, though - are the specified tolerances and measurements based on RL standards? That wouldn't make this illegal if they were, but in my experience proposals that just specify a lot of numbers like this don't tend to pass. Is there a way to approach this whereby the goal (generalized non-interference of electronic devices with each other) is stated and achieved, rather than keeping silent as to all except the numbers?

[Araraukar]

OOC: After having just spent much of the afternoon refreshing my memories on brown dwarves, Saturn's moon Titan and the possibility of life in such conditions, and I honestly don't feel like spending another day learning about radio equipment, even if the information was findable online, nor do I think the proposal makes much sense without such information...

The first three definitions are okay, they're the usual "defines X as Y" and use normal language (except for "not purposed for", but I think that's just a writer's brainfart) and normal terms. That's where the definitions should have ended. You could have written the entire proposal with just them. The last two definitions instead go for a "defines Y as X" format, and are actually not needed.

Then come a lot of numbers with no justification given whatsoever OR references of things people are familiar with OR any explanation for terms like "field intensity value", "specific load impedance" or "quasi-peak reading". People have a tendency to vote against things they don't understand. I certainly would, especially as I'm quite certain the author doesn't understand these either, or else they would have been able to write it in a more approachable way than just copying numbers off of something.

Especially as according to this, the unit of the values given has nothing to do with any kind of interference but rather noise level of the signal - basically the "fuzziness" of the signal. And according to this, the interference has more to do with the physical structure of the receiver than any signal, fuzzy or not.

Then the proposal randomly bans and randomly permits stuff, without, again, any justification.

What it doesn't have, which is weird, anything about like keeping the devices capable of causing serious interference away from, say, sensitive hospital devices. Or any actual, you know, consumer protection things. So as is, it reads as a category/AoE failure. And the Hereby clause at the end is unnecessary and just stupid, given that it doesn't do any of those things.

I do want to ask, though - are the specified tolerances and measurements based on RL standards?

Not according to Google (at least with that unit), which makes the numbers even more arbitrary.

[Greater Cesnica]

OOC: After having just spent much of the afternoon refreshing my memories on brown dwarves, Saturn's moon Titan and the possibility of life in such conditions, and I honestly don't feel like spending another day learning about radio equipment, even if the information was findable online, nor do I think the proposal makes much sense without such information...

The first three definitions are okay, they're the usual "defines X as Y" and use normal language (except for "not purposed for", but I think that's just a writer's brainfart) and normal terms. That's where the definitions should have ended. You could have written the entire proposal with just them. The last two definitions instead go for a "defines Y as X" format, and are actually not needed.

Then come a lot of numbers with no justification given whatsoever OR references of things people are familiar with OR any explanation for terms like "field intensity value", "specific load impedance" or "quasi-peak reading". People have a tendency to vote against things they don't understand. I certainly would, especially as I'm quite certain the author doesn't understand these either, or else they would have been able to write it in a more approachable way than just copying numbers off of something.

Especially as according to this, the unit of the values given has nothing to do with any kind of interference but rather noise level of the signal - basically the "fuzziness" of the signal. And according to this, the interference has more to do with the physical structure of the receiver than any signal, fuzzy or not.

Then the proposal randomly bans and randomly permits stuff, without, again, any justification.

What it doesn't have, which is weird, anything about like keeping the devices capable of causing serious interference away from, say, sensitive hospital devices. Or any actual, you know, consumer protection things. So as is, it reads as a category/AoE failure. And the Hereby clause at the end is unnecessary and just stupid, given that it doesn't do any of those things.

I do want to ask, though - are the specified tolerances and measurements based on RL standards?

Not according to Google (at least with that unit), which makes the numbers even more arbitrary.

Especially as according to this, the unit of the values given has nothing to do with any kind of interference but rather noise level of the signal - basically the "fuzziness" of the signal.

You do realize that electromagnetic noise is primarily the disturbance that can interfere with radio-communications, navigation systems, electronic storage systems, etc. etc.?

And according to this, the interference has more to do with the physical structure of the receiver than any signal, fuzzy or not.

There is a reason why such RFI events occur through physical defects. Due to regulations imposed on manufacturers (the goal of this resolution), most electronic devices capable of causing electromagnetic interference are equipped with shielding materials and have loads embedded onto the electrical circuitry to mitigate adverse interference.

Then the proposal randomly bans and randomly permits stuff, without, again, any justification.

Specify what it is that the proposal 'randomly bans and randomly permits'? In the real world, countries that have regulations to curb the potential for adverse interference do not permit the sale, import, export, or distribution of such violating products. Also in the real world, these regulations do not apply to technologies used in the pursuit of national defense or law enforcement. As well, universities and other scientific research organizations such as CERN are generally exempt as well, because of the preliminary precautions that such projects are proven to have taken before being granted permission to perform research and experiments that in any other setting would cause severe unintended EM interference.

What it doesn't have, which is weird, anything about like keeping the devices capable of causing serious interference away from, say, sensitive hospital devices.

Valid point, I'll try to keep any additions concise.

Then come a lot of numbers with no justification given whatsoever OR references of things people are familiar with OR any explanation for terms like "field intensity value", "specific load impedance" or "quasi-peak reading". People have a tendency to vote against things they don't understand. I certainly would, especially as I'm quite certain the author doesn't understand these either, or else they would have been able to write it in a more approachable way than just copying numbers off of something.

I was attempting to keep the proposal short. Also, that jab wasn't necessary. I'm going by real-world standards from the Canadian government, the FCC, and the United Kingdom.


Overall, yes, I understand that I should have clarified my units more. At the same time, I'm trying to keep the proposal concise and ordered. If you had actually looked up the effects of electromagnetic noise instead of looking up the unit and finding that link, you would have known that limiting dBμV readings would make sense. I find it disheartening that you felt the need to make that jab about you being quite certain about my ineptitude regarding this subject matter rather than actually looking to fully understand what I'm trying to get at with this proposal yourself.

[Greater Cesnica]

I have fixed a few omissions and mistakes, and added a couple of clauses in response to feedback I received below.

[Greater Cesnica]

OOC
RL units are okay, as long as (a) they're reasonably "standard" ones (fitting within the 'understandable English') rule, and (b) if they're named after RL people then their names have been formally established as names for units (rather than as personal references) and thus normally take lower-case first letters. "hertz" is therefore 'legally' acceptable, in the correct context, just like ""centimeters" or "grams", feet" or "pounds". [one-sixth of GenSec]

2/6.

I do want to ask, though - are the specified tolerances and measurements based on RL standards? That wouldn't make this illegal if they were, but in my experience proposals that just specify a lot of numbers like this don't tend to pass. Is there a way to approach this whereby the goal (generalized non-interference of electronic devices with each other) is stated and achieved, rather than keeping silent as to all except the numbers?

The standards are based on RL standards. Specifically Canadian standards. I don't know why Araraukar is intent on spreading misinformation by saying that they aren't.

If you wanna see the exact regulations: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.n ... 11413.html

[Araraukar]

I don't know why Araraukar is intent on spreading misinformation by saying that they aren't.

OOC: Googling "quasi-peak reading of 60 dBμV" still returns only this thread as a result.

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf11413.html

See all the words used in that, that aren't used in yours? All the explanations of what it's talking about and why it's placing the restrictions it is? The explanations that aren't nowhere in your proposal? And the previous law it references? That doesn't exist in GA? Which in turn refers to a bunch of other regulations that don't exist in GA? All of which creates the framework for the one you aped.

You've clearly started to tackle this chain from the wrong end. You're basically throwing out numbers that don't tell anyone anything, place restrictions without explaining what you're restricting and from what and why it needs international legislation to do so, when the one you're quoting as inspiration is a national law. As written, your proposal is bad, full of meaningless technical jargon and using weird units, random numbers and no reasoning whatsoever. And no, the preamble doesn't count, as it doesn't have anything to do with the language in the active clauses.

If you really know this subject, you should be able to "dumb it down" - cut out all numbers and instead use the reasoning why each number is chosen in RL. If one of those numbers means (I don't know what they mean, I'm not that interested in it, this is just an example) "transmission strong enough, in wide enough propagation wave that it can interfere with cellphone communication", then use that wording instead of the number. Open up all the jargon into language that anyone's grandmother could understand, and you'll have reached the right level.

It's doable. But you grumping about people not being experts in a narrow expert field won't help your cause. Get to work; if this really is your area of expertize, you can do it. If it's not, well, you would be doing yourself a favour too, in learning WHY the limits exist, rather than simply what they are.

[Greater Cesnica]

If you really know this subject, you should be able to "dumb it down" - cut out all numbers and instead use the reasoning why each number is chosen in RL. If one of those numbers means (I don't know what they mean, I'm not that interested in it, this is just an example) "transmission strong enough, in wide enough propagation wave that it can interfere with cellphone communication", then use that wording instead of the number. Open up all the jargon into language that anyone's grandmother could understand, and you'll have reached the right level.

I mean, if the issue is about a wider audience grasping the subject matter, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to include a bit briefly explaining the purpose of throwing those numbers at the reader.

[Araraukar]

I suppose it wouldn't hurt to include a bit briefly explaining the purpose of throwing those numbers at the reader.

OOC: Going in the right way, but ditch the numbers entirely and use the reason the numbers exist. It's clear the limits are set for certain reason. Use that reason instead of a number.

[Greater Cesnica]

I suppose it wouldn't hurt to include a bit briefly explaining the purpose of throwing those numbers at the reader.

OOC: Going in the right way, but ditch the numbers entirely and use the reason the numbers exist. It's clear the limits are set for certain reason. Use that reason instead of a number.

Got rid of numbers, left the units and added explanations.

[Kenmoria]

“I may be missing something, but ‘a given field intensity value’ is exceptionally vague. What given value?”

[Greater Cesnica]

“I may be missing something, but ‘a given field intensity value’ is exceptionally vague. What given value?”

(OOC): See, this is precisely why I was arguing with Araraukar. I wanted to keep the numbers in the resolution, but they said don't do that lol.

EDIT: Let me first clarify what specific field intensity I'm talking about here lol.

[Kenmoria]

“I may be missing something, but ‘a given field intensity value’ is exceptionally vague. What given value?”

(OOC): See, this is precisely why I was arguing with Araraukar. I wanted to keep the numbers in the resolution, but they said don't do that lol.

(OOC: What Araraukar meant was to use the reasons as to why those numbers exist, not to put in the numbers themselves. Leaving it vague is useless.)

[Greater Cesnica]

(OOC): See, this is precisely why I was arguing with Araraukar. I wanted to keep the numbers in the resolution, but they said don't do that lol.

(OOC: What Araraukar meant was to use the reasons as to why those numbers exist, not to put in the numbers themselves. Leaving it vague is useless.)

(Yeah, true. Working on an edit, one sec.)

[Greater Cesnica]

Elaborated on technical explanations of what field intensity refers to.

[Greater Cesnica]

Any other feedback y'all could suggest?

[Morover]

"It may be simpler to define a field limit in the definitions clause, as opposed to in the middle of the proposal."

OOC: Also, why is the first "i" in the proposal title uncapitalized?

[Greater Cesnica]

"It may be simpler to define a field limit in the definitions clause, as opposed to in the middle of the proposal."

OOC: Also, why is the first "i" in the proposal title uncapitalized?

OOC: Thanks for pointing out the 'i' error. As for your main point, I did away with field limits as a definition and used more cohesive terminology and definitions.

[Greater Cesnica]

Right now I'm happy with the proposal in its current state. Just waiting for additional feedback, suggestions, or if I missed something somewhere. Then, I would probably submit.

[Araraukar]

OOC post.

Okay, you've proven that you listen to feedback even when you don't like the criticism. So let's get down to do some serious work.

Area of Effect: Consumer Protection

As written, "Safety" would be more apt AoE.

Acknowledging the importance of digital devices and information technology apparatuses in our day and age,

Since you're talking specifically about radio technology, putting that into your opening clause is pertinent. I suggest something like "Acknowledging the importance of interference-free radio communications for the use of digital devices so prevalent in our day and age,". Title-dropping is not always bad, for technical proposals.

Aware that digital devices and information technology apparatuses that fail to properly contain radio-communication emissions that may be used by such devices may cause damage to important infrastructure, transportation systems, network systems, and other critical apparatuses in our society,

Understanding that in order to prevent damage or severe disruption of critical infrastructure due to this interference, guidelines and safeguards must be implemented in electronic devices to prevent said interference from disrupting other devices and infrastructure,

This sounds backwards, given that it's frequently the digital devices themselves that get interfered with. And further, you need to emphasize the need for international regulations. I'd nix these entirely and go further into the importance of interference-free communications. You also need to think of RL realities here; everyone on these forums has at times suffered from bad internet connections or bad cellphone connections. Touch base with that annoyance, early in the preamble, and you'll get votes for that alone.

Seeking to define sets of standards to which such digital devices and information technology apparatuses shall be held in compliance with,

Too wordy. Or wordy in a wrong way. "Shall be held in compliance with" doesn't belong into the preamble.

Defines, in accordance with the aims of this resolution,

Put in "hereby" before the active clauses, and number your main clauses (which you can do by hand, just adding "1." before "Defines"). I also suggest using the lowercase letters for the list code. If you need help on that, just let me know.

A digital device as an electronic device that can receive, store, process, create or send digital information.

These should all end in commas, not periods. But additionally, I get that ^that is probably the official definition of a digital device, yet it's not really what you're after (especially given the silly "with the aims of this resolution"). You're after things that can be disrupted by electromagnetic interference. And civilian ones at that. You should instead go for something like "a digital device as an electronic device using radio signals to send and receive digital information" to emphasize that this is all about the radio signals.

Though it occurs to me that this defined term isn't actually used in the proposal currently. (My wording suggestions below fix that.)

Radio-communication as the transmission and detection of communication signals and other such information in the form of electromagnetic waves for the purpose of initiating technological functions remotely or for the purpose of enabling direct communication between two or more radio transmitters or receivers.

Okay, yeah, no. Keep definitions as simple as possible. Common words and concepts don't need definitions unless they're used in ways that differ from their dictionary uses. "Radio communications" (note that it's usually used as plural) don't really need defining here. Also, there's no hyphen necessary. English makes compound words without connecting the words "physically".

Interference-causing equipment as a device, machinery or equipment intended for civilian use, not purposed for performing specific actions directly connected to executing the continuation of radio-communication that causes or is capable of causing interference to radio-communications.

Remember the "KISS" principle. And also, definitions need precision, as the rest of the proposal rests on the foundation they create.

Class A interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended for civilian use in a residential environment.

Grammar fix. These are subclauses, not independent sentences. Remember to switch periods into commas, too. Emphasizing the civilian aspect throughout so that you'll get fewer votes against just because people think you're talking about military technology.

Class B interference-causing devices as being interference-causing equipment intended solely for non-residential civilian use in commercial, industrial or business environments, and whose design or other characteristics strongly preclude the possibility of its use in a residential environment.

Again, KISS principle and besides, if you say "solely for non-residential use", you don't need to specify what counts as non-residential.

Standardizing sufficient conformity for interference-causing equipment and radio-communication apparatuses as follows:

Bad proposal, no cookie! Don't use textbook text. Makes it look like you're 1. copying off of something and 2. want to sound smarter than your readers. Imagine talking to your grandmother, who's never really understood the newfangled digital devices (or if your granny is tech-savvy, then your great-grandmother). How would you reword that so she'd understand?

Class A and Class B interference-causing devices producing given values of megahertz (MHz) must not exceed a corresponding electromagnetic field strength value, expressed in the unit of field intensity dBμV (Voltage expressed in dB above one micro-volt into a specific load impedance).

No. Give the REASON the limits exist, not the explanation of what the limits are made of.

Elaborates Requires that interference-causing devices producing radio-emissions in a given megahertz range must not produce electromagnetic noise emissions sufficient enough to cause the electromagnetic field of the device's emission to adversely significantly interfere with other devices and/ radio communications of digital devices or essential machinery.

KISS again. Also, "Elaborates" is not a mandate, and you can't make everything interference-proof, so only significant interference should be accounted for.

Reasons that Class A and B interference-causing devices must not exceed these limits for the following reasons: if the emission of electromagnetic noise exceeds the electromagnetic shielding (measures against emissions spreading outside the device) for a corresponding megahertz value, then there will be the potential for adverse electromagnetic interference.

No. Again, don't quote values (even without numbers, those are still the values), quote the reasons the values exist. Why must they not exceed the limits? Why do the limits exist?

Further reasons that all interference-causing devices thatexceed a device's electromagnetic shielding measures have the potential to cause adverse electromagnetic interference by exposinge outside other devices or machinery to electromagnetic fields interference levels capable of damaging the affected devices or inhibiting the usage and/or functionality of effected equipment. their use,

Again, these are (for some reason) subclauses, not self-standing clauses, and KISS, and grammar and all that.

Directs Requires that all Class A and B interference-causing devices that violate these standards shall not be permitted to be imported, exported, or otherwise distributed between member states,

...why do you actually need the class A and B at all? You're not doing anything with them separately. Also, this forbids international trade, but are they still fine for developing and producing them internally?

Further directs that any consumers, organizations, and/or corporations that are adversely affected by electronic devices or equipment that violate the guidelines established in this resolution be eligible to receive monetary compensation if such compensation is required in order to offset personal or financial losses.

Don't copy the litigiousness of USA, where if the manual of either device doesn't say that you can't dry a cellphone dropped into water by heating it in a microwave oven, you can sue the manufacturer (because apparently common sense does not exist on that side of the Atlantic Ocean or so the manuals of imported devices would have me believe). Also, given that you're banning the devices - which reminds me that you might want to actually forbid their use - then the justice system is perfectly capable of handling the cases on themselves.

Exempts from the provisions of this resolution from any technology, devices, apparatus, machine, or system intended for use by the armed forces or law enforcement, intelligence agencies, space agencies, and certain scientific research projects or and organizations of member states that have the approval of the state they operate in,

Separating military from the rest of the list, so the rest can be made to need approval of the state. But are you intentionally banning the "denial of service" devices used in some places (used to be used in some movie theatres to interfere with the smartphone signals, so people couldn't record and post movies online when viewing them in theathres) to prevent digital communications? If not, you may need to have a re-think of some of the definitions or clauses.

Encourages member states to establish technical standards pursuant to the aims of this resolution in an effort to further regulate and standardize electronic devices,

Reword this for your great-grandmother.

Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry.

Unnecessary fluff you're better off without. This isn't a repeal where the last clause is the only effective one.

[Greater Cesnica]

Tried to take most of those suggestions from Araraukar. I was dealing with legal and personal issues, so I had no time to deal with this. Also side pet projects and school. But that's besides the point. What do y'all think now?

[Imperium Anglorum]

If you want to make clauses that have exceptions built into them, put them in the same clause.

Make your lists from the list coding, or else you'll get graphical inconsistencies à la Promotion of Recycling.

Remove the portion at the bottom saying 'Hereby approves this resolution in order to safeguard consumers, business owners, workers, and the electronics industry'.

How do you think about interference at a border with a non-member state or at mixture of residential and non-residential equipment?