We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Policy on Source Code
Details
Submitted by[?]: Party for a Federal Meritocracy
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2573
Description[?]:
| We have all heard the arguments, and some even bought into them and made the current economically indefensible law. It remains true that forcing companies to give away their work by forcing all code to be open simply means companies will not write code in our country. Individuals can and do, as do some foundations, organizations, and charities. Companies, however, cannot afford the current law. For what reason would they buy the equipment and pay the staff simply to give up all rights to anything produced? And what kind of tech support do you get for an open software product? Before answering--think about that and consider if the average user, our citizens, are finding that level of support adequate. If not, what are they doing instead and what is that doing to our nation as regards the level of technological competency of our citizens. In other words, how many are simply giving up and not using technology instead of fighting through it (if they can)? Private companies exist to make a profit and they must be allowed to do so. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on the source code of software.
Old value:: The government requires that all source be opened.
Current: The government allows both open and closed source software.
Proposed: The government allows both open and closed source software.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:35:08, May 07, 2008 CET | From |  Scientific Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Policy on Source Code |
| Message | As we said the last time this came up, this is a hard one. On the one hand, forcing all source to be open is government intervention and thus bad. On the other hand, allowing groups to register patents that the government will protect is also government intervention and thus bad. However, come to think of it, the prooposed law doesn't necessarily mean that the government will protect closed source software. The corporations themselves could do their own work keeping it secret. We approve. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 316 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 17 |
| Random fact: Your user name is not your party name. Choose a concise and easy to remember user name. You can change your party name at any point in time later in the game. |
| Random quote: "It all came from there." - Lech Walesa (pointing to a TV when a reporter asked him why communism fell) |