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: 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Anarcho-Transcendentalist Party
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: January 2263
Description[?]:
| We cannot hope to claim a free society if the very tools for building this society are locked due to financial issues. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Protection of original works of technology and arts.
Old value:: Works of technology and art are protected by copyright.
Current: Works of technology and art are protected by copyright.
Proposed: Technology and art are part of the commons and are not protected by copyright.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:00:51, July 29, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Alcoholic Party II | To | Debating the 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified) |
| Message | The right to intellectual property isn't a "financial issue" - it's a fundamental human right. If we abolish copyright law, artists, authors, musicians and anyone else who creates anything can have their work stolen. This is a moral, not a financial issue. |
| Date | 22:53:38, July 29, 2006 CET | From | Anarcho-Transcendentalist Party | To | Debating the 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified) |
| Message | We all know that who profits most from knowledge, art and technology are not the authors, but the whole range of intermediaries that stand in the way of the authors\' communication with the People. Access to these tools of society is being marketed by those intermediaries who care little for the authors\' work. The greatest satisfaction of an author is to be read, listened, enjoyed and feel useful. Copyright is mutilation of this satisfaction. |
| Date | 18:25:11, July 30, 2006 CET | From | Central Block | To | Debating the 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified) |
| Message | It is true that art should be accessible for everyone to enjoy and we agree with the ATP when it comes to the exploitation of artists by said intermediaries. However, works of technology can and should remain to be patentable and copywritable as they are, in many cases, the result of large investments and contribute to the development of the national economy. |
| Date | 21:03:17, July 30, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Alcoholic Party II | To | Debating the 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified) |
| Message | I disagree with the ATP that the greatest satisfaction of "an author" (implying all authors) is to be read. It's great to have your work read, but it's not so great when you don't earn a living from it AND your work is unattributable to you. The abolition of copyright means that anyone can claim a work as their own and nobody will be any the wiser. |
| Date | 23:42:29, July 30, 2006 CET | From | Anarcho-Transcendentalist Party | To | Debating the 2260 Culture Access Bill (rectified) |
| Message | We're still putting it to vote so, as we are not yet convinced of your arguments. We believe that yhere are more just ways of protecting the authors' earnings. We separated the first article of this bill as it hasn't been discussed. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 303 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 296 |
| Random fact: Check out the forum regularly for game news. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: the communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.'" - Phelps Adams |