Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: May 5461
Next month in: 01:07:43
Server time: 10:52:16, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): hnp19 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Defamation Act of 4199

Details

Submitted by[?]: Independent Democratic Party (IDP)

Status[?]: defeated

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: July 4200

Description[?]:

Under our current laws there is no legal actions that a company or individual can take against another company or individual if they become a victim of false slander and defamation. This is making it possible for larger corporations to degrade and potentially hurt smaller companies. The Independent Democratic Party is suggesting that we take action against false slander and give companies and individuals legal grounds to sue if they can provide proof that the false attacks hurt their business or caused harm to their public image.

We suggest that we create a law that would protect the innocent from false accusations that could potentially harm their small business or their way of life.

This law would only protect those who can provide proof that the slander is false and that it has in some way harmed their business or their every day life.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date12:49:48, April 21, 2017 CET
FromSunrise Party 해돋이당
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageDear Speaker,

We of the NCP feel that, although well-intentioned, this law could be harmful to our democracy as corporations and political organizations could use this law to sue rival political groups and effectively censor their speech by adding extra costs to free speech. We recommend a vote of 'nay' for this bill.

Park Jin-Soo

Date15:48:41, April 21, 2017 CET
FromSocial Democrat Alliance
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageMr. Speaker,

We are conflicted about this Bill. We see the reasoning of the Independant Democratic Party, but we also share the doubts of the Conservatives. Can the IDP give us more reasons for supporting this Bill?

Kind regards,
The SDA

Date16:48:24, April 21, 2017 CET
FromConservative Party (보수당)
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageMr Speaker,
We are on the fence about this bill. We see benefits and issues with it so will most likely abstain when it goes to voting

John McLui
Labour Leader

Date20:16:27, April 21, 2017 CET
FromIndependent Democratic Party (IDP)
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageThe purpose would be to not only protect the businesses that make suffer from an unfair and unjust campaign by a larger corporation, but to also insure consumers are receiving fair and honest information as well.

We want to insure our citizens that the information they are receiving from the media and other entities is truthful and we are sure that this bill would provide that.

Here is an example of how this could and will work.

A Large Corporation who has been threatened by another smaller, but rising corporation who are in the same industry as the larger corporation and offer better prices for consumers. The large corporation have viewed them as a threat because of the drop in their sales so they have decided to create a smear campaign against the smaller corporation by claiming that their products were imported from countries who have no child labor laws and that the reason their prices are so low is because these countries also pay their citizens 1.75 DRA an hour. This smear campaign, because of the outreach of the large corporation, has now made its way to the national media organizations and has further harmed the smaller corporations credibility. Now the smaller corporation does now have as much outreach as the large corporation so they have trouble proving their innocence which has caused major problems and this corporation has started to lose customers to a point of having to shut down.
Now under our current laws the small corporation has no legal rights to sue the large corporation for false slander and has to close their doors and lay off hundreds, possibly thousands, of Dranlandians. Now since the small corporation has closed down the large corporation now has a monopoly and increases their prices which has hurt the consumer who was misinformed.

Now if we had a slander law the small corporation could have been protected against the smear campaign and other start-up corporations and businesses will be too. This will in turn create a fair environment for the businesses and their consumers ensuring competition and better prices.

Date21:09:15, April 21, 2017 CET
FromIndependent Democratic Party (IDP)
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageAlso we already have Libel laws which gives everyone the right to sue anyone over false defamation if the defamation is printed. I would just like to take this one step further and give them the right to sue when false slander is stated. Which means that defamation doesn't only have to be printed but can be spoken as well.

Date20:56:02, April 22, 2017 CET
FromConservative Party (보수당)
ToDebating the Defamation Act of 4199
MessageMr speaker
We will be abstaining in this bill

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
 

Total Seats: 0

no
 

Total Seats: 35

abstain
      

Total Seats: 149


Random fact: Make sure to check out Particracy's wiki. http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

Random quote: "They should rule who are able to rule best." - Aristotle

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 62