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: Open Technology Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Project Rutania
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: March 4216
Description[?]:
| An act to open software and technology to innovation. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on the source code of software.
Old value:: The government allows both open and closed source software.
Current: The government does not require that all source be opened but heavilly regulates closed source software.
Proposed: The government requires that all source be opened.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The patenting of software techniques.
Old value:: Software patents can be obtained from the patent office.
Current: Software patents can be obtained from the patent office.
Proposed: Software designs, techniques, formulae and algorithms cannot be patented.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:39:33, May 24, 2017 CET | From | Whig Party | To | Debating the Open Technology Act |
| Message | Mr. Speaker we in the Whig Party must reject this bill due to what we believe will be the unfair practices this legislation would permit along with the unsustainable environment it would create for businesses. Removing the right to seek a patent on software designs and new developments would send a message to any tech companies considering Rutania that this isnt the place to be. This would punish those innovators out there instead of allowing them to reap the fruits of their hard work. -William Von-Strauss Whig High Council Member PA member |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 83 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 441 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 200 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "You have to remember one thing about the will of the people: it wasn't that long ago that we were swept away by the Macarena." - Jon Stewart |