PCA - Defining the CDS

Desmond Shang · Post by **Desmond Shang** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:35 pm

Ooooh... I am all agitated now - I've been forum poked!

*puffs up proudly with stern demeanor but with sensitive side showing through despite himself, all teary-eyed*

I am soooo gonna test your criminal court thingie mechanism whatever ya call it. Just think - a test case! What fun!!!

Will dropping a prim on the lawn be good enough?

I'm looking for all the official CDS summons, documents and proceedings I can get my hands on. A trial date would be cool too! Send a notecard or better yet, a texture - my IM's tend to get capped.

Can I bring lawyers and observers and stuff? Metaverse Messenger, Herald, SLNN, Reuters? Ashcroft, Prokofy et al?

I pwomise not to fill the sim, but you might wanna bump capacity over 40 people.

It's gonna be a partay! Maybe I'll go as my wittle wabbit avatar... it's got big, soulful eyes that sway juries...

Sudane Erato · Post by **Sudane Erato** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:09 am

Patroklus Murakami wrote:
2. Who holds CDS property, particularly intellectual property, on behalf of the CDS? I think using Rudeen Edo as our 'repository' for this as well as the 'avatar-face' of the CDS makes sense.

In other places (too early in the morning to find them) I have tried to express my interpretation of the role Rudeen plays in the CDS community; namely, that she is a technical "holder of authority" seen in the eyes of Linden Labs. But from the point of view of the CDS, she is simply an automaton. The mechanism works because the community has developed some confidence that I (as Rudeen's "operater") will continute to operate her in that fashion.

So, we have unspoken assumptions here. While we do have the EO act, we also assume that Sudane has noble intentions here... she'll continue to operate the EO alt in a fashion supportive of the community and consistent with the EO Act. Cause if she doesn't, the whole thing collapses.

And, since everyone unspokenly assumes that, that makes Rudeen a safe place on which to load other functions. We use an "institutionalized assumption" to find a home for the various "value things" of the community.

To be frank, I feel that taking such a step reinforces the fact of our community in a state of child-like dependency on the mother. The benevolent and all supportive mother, in whom we entrust the most valuable and important things, the things we really can't afford to lose. She's safe, she's secure, she's eternal.

People, that's not the real world. At some point in time the EO will need to be replaced. Do you really want to pile so much "confidence"... so much of your substance of real value... in one person, who will need from time to time to be replaced. Who even today has no effective system of accountability.

I know that Desmond has been offerred the "Queenship", but in fact you've already given away the post to me. The Queenship is that role, above all others, which contains the ultimate confidence of the community. Well, I don't want it, and I don't think its appropriate for our kind of community.

I have volunteered to fill the roles of EO, via my alt, and Treasurer, until such time as the community chooses replacements. If we want a safe repository for our IP content, then establish a bank, and deposit them there. Don't reinforce the mythical mother and give them all to her.

Sudane..............................

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:26 am

Guess that scotches that idea!

Okay, any other suggestions for where we can safely store the CDS IP on behalf of the CDS? Should government officials (RA, SC and Exec) keep a copy of important builds, textures etc in their inventory? Should only a subset of those officials (LRA, Dean, Chancellor) be entrusted with them?

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:15 am

Good point Sudane! We would be a monarchy with the illusion of democracy on the path we were on!

So .... Pat .... looks like were back to having to trust each other again!

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 5:26 am

[quote="Desmond Shang":rjbid7nz]Ooooh... I am all agitated now - I've been forum poked! [/quote:rjbid7nz]

Hahahaha

Well, Desmond - you know you have ARRIVED in CDS when you are offered a noble title (Queen) and declared a traitor by Beathan.

So ... although we are 'egalitarian' ... and politely avoiding staring at your jackboots ... (I suppose you wear those when not wearing your rollerskates, and, yeah, where the hell did that come from?) ... please don't drop any prims ... we have a hard working staff of SIM janitors that have to clean it up.

Perhaps just pass a notecard to Beathan saying that you would report a TOS violation to LL and not CDS. That ought to do it.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:39 am

Well Pat, Sundane's comments don't come as a surprise. I actually read her posts and listen to what she says, and it was crystal clear to me she wouldn't consent to Rudeen being the legal persona of the CDS.

I go back to my original proposal: a Great Council made up the the Heads of each branch (SC Dean, LRA, Chancellor - I'd also say Chief Justice but since we don't have one I won't argue in favor of a ghost! ) , who would collectively set up a CDSPresident Oh (or some other such name) and would operate it by consensus.

I am not in favor of a rotating Chair of the GC for two reasons: first, we want to know at all times who accesses the CDS President Oh -and if three people can do it this complicates matters; and second, there is a TOS problem with having 3 individuals accessing the same avie which I'd rather avoid (although not completely, since control would still be passed down the line to future Chancellors; but at least it's one person at time...).

Personally, I favor the Chancellor being the Chair of the GC - after all, he or she is the Head of the Executive- , especially if the position's democratic legitimacy will be increased by direct elections. I would be uncomfortable with the SC Dean holding the Chair because of the office's unelected position (never mind the fact I am not at all certain Gwyn would accept - see Sudane's post above), and I would certainly oppose giving the LRA (head of the Legislative branch) sole effective control over the legal persona of the CDS.

So what all this comes down to is that 3 people would have to get together from time to time, in-world of in forums, decide on any issues coming up from time to time that have to do with *the CDS*, and instruct the Chancellor to act (or not) accordingly as the CDS President Oh.

Any better suggestions?

PS. The Queenship offer to Des was meant only half-jokingly. I would have no problem if the RA chose, the SC approved, and the Chancellor endorsed the appointment of a life President (or Queen! ) acting on instructions of the Great Council. If the branches agreed on one individual, I'd also have it submitted to a referendum as per the CARE Referendum Act.

Tanoujin Milestone · Post by **Tanoujin Milestone** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 11:14 am

In reply to Pat's 3 Questions

1. The Citizens are the CDS, a souvereign delegating tasks to the Representative Assembly.

2. I agree with Sudane, our EO, that should be an executive, is a rollerscating Queen by role and the potential benevolent dictator we have to get rid of under the presets of LL - can we work around this within the boundaries of SL?
Nevertheless, EO and holder of public property are perfectly predisposed to share the same bureau, as soon as we solve the problem how to control that executives efficiently.

3. The Representative Assembly is the legitimate Representation of the citizens equivalent to the CDS. Possibly the service role of the RA to represent the citizens externally as well as internally is not given in Article I - Section 1 of our Constitution, because it is self evident by name?

The RA may choose one of its members to represent us as a whole if needed and as long as it is needed, telling that person what to say on behalf of us citizens, and may do so by using any procedure they see fit
Let the people outside the CDS know they should contact the RA to get a Representative appointed.

4. Do not add another entity to represent us, this is like adding cylinders to a car instead of driving it.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 12:38 pm

I'm sorry, but the RA is only one branch of our system of government. I cannot disagree more strongly with your ideas that a) the RA represents the CDS on its own and b) that the RA can select one of its members to represent the CDS externally or c) that the CDS contact point should be the RA.

This goes against all notions of checks and balances and separation of powers.

As far as the Great Council is concerned, just consider: it is 3 already existing officials meeting for a specific purpose - nothing more. No new offices are created, no new elections are held. It just gives a specific name to a type of meeting between 3 CDS officials.

Gxeremio Dimsum · Post by **Gxeremio Dimsum** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:41 pm

re: the avatar proxy issue, maybe we could buy a last name and have avs with certain powers (like Treasurer CDS or Estate CDS) that could then be clearly named and easily transferred as people changed posts.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:15 pm

Gx,

Wew are doing that already: Rudeen for the EO and Guilda for the Guild. My proposal for the CDS legal persona is quite similar.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:18 pm

Gx,

Wew are doing that already: Rudeen for the EO and Guilda for the Guild. My proposal for the CDS legal persona is quite similar. The last name idea is interesting; it could function like our version of the Linden name. THe problem i have is that under the TOS trasferring avatars to other individuals is a no-no, so I am not sure quite how we would eplain this to LL.

Gxeremio Dimsum · Post by **Gxeremio Dimsum** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:48 pm

[quote="michelmanen":15u3vpgx]Gx,

Wew are doing that already: Rudeen for the EO and Guilda for the Guild. My proposal for the CDS legal persona is quite similar. The last name idea is interesting; it could function like our version of the Linden name. THe problem i have is that under the TOS trasferring avatars to other individuals is a no-no, so I am not sure quite how we would eplain this to LL.[/quote:15u3vpgx]

I'm aware of Rudeen and Guilda, but I understood one of the problems to be Rudeen's status (owned by Sudane, not by the CDS).

On a related note, have we considered automating the tier collection process with those rental boxes I see elsewhere in SL? It says who owns the plot and how much time they have remaining on the land.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:02 pm

Yes, Sudane is developing such a system. The boxes are already set up in the small Athena temple on the backstreet leading to the Emporium Romani back entrance, close to the Forum, in CN.

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:12 pm

[quote="Gxeremio Dimsum":28br8i08]
On a related note, have we considered automating the tier collection process with those rental boxes I see elsewhere in SL? It says who owns the plot and how much time they have remaining on the land.[/quote:28br8i08]

I believe Sudane would like to do nothing more than automate the "back office" portion of it! A manual method cannot be much fun!

Jon Seattle · Post by **Jon Seattle** » Sun Aug 12, 2007 4:44 am

There are various ways we can do this. The main thing is to keep control of the IP rights in the hands of the CDS.

1. One option is to become a RL organization. I think this may be what Michel is getting at with his "great council" proposal.

Anther option along the same lines would be to register the entire CDS as a non-profit organization. The issue there is that (at least in the US) we would have to register bylaws (I expect the constitution would do) and also make our officers RL identities known. Its this latter point that has kept the CDS from doing this in the past.

2. We could make the conditions of content use a provision of a contract between two parties. That is create a contract between an artist and someone else which restricts content use to the CDS and prevents its withdrawal from CDS use.

My original thought was to make this other party the EO as the EO already acts in this way for the ownership of the islands, and this would just add to the value of those holdings without really changing the relationship.

The important part of this, however, is the contract between the two parties (artist and legal content owner) and not individual content owner. We could find another content owner, possibly even an existing non-profit with an interest in supporting projects like ours.

It may be a good idea to have a legal content owner that does not directly control the backups ("own" in the Lindon Labs sense) but hands that role over to a CDS appointed person or group for management. If the CO decided to "take down" content they would have a harder time, and most likely the provisions of the contract between artist and CO that prevented withdrawing content from the CDS would be examined in the process.