Public Consultation and Legislation Submissions

[FairBol]

If that passes, "the South will rise again", LOL. 

[FairBol]

A BILL

protecting the right to produce music that is inspired by other works

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Inspiration Is Not Theft Act of 2020". 

SECTION 2. FINDINGS.

A. In 2013, defendants Mr. Pharrell Williams, Mr. Robin Thicke, and Mr. Clifford Harris, Jr., were served with a lawsuit from plaintiffs representing the estate of Marvin Gaye, Jr. (Mr. Frankie Christian Gaye, Mr. Marvin Gaye III, and Ms. Nona Marvisa Gaye, respectively). 

B. The defendants, which may be referred to as the "Thicke Group", are songwriters and musicians by trade.

C. The matter at issue in this case involves copyright infringement; specifically, does the musical composition "Blurred Lines" (as written by Williams, Thicke, and Harris) copy the essential elements in the Gaye composition "Got To Give It Up" (as written by Mr. Marvin Gaye, Jr.) (thus entitling the plaintiffs to financial relief)?

D. Although the two songs share a similar style, the underlying melodies and harmonies are not sufficiently similar to one another. 

E. A district court entered judgment for the plaintiffs; on appeal, this was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

F. As decided by the Ninth Circuit, the ruling in this case effectively declares that works imitating, but not specifically copying, other works may be regarded as copyright infringements. 

G. This decision has had, and will continue to have, a "chilling effect" on the capability of songwriters to produce works evoking other eras or styles. 

H. As a matter of routine, many musical acts and works imitate the style of other musical acts and works. 

SECTION 3. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS.

A. It shall not be a violation of copyright law to:

1. Imitate, or borrow from, the style of another artist or composition. 

2. Produce a work parodying another's compositions or style. 

3. Employ, or assist in employing, any person who created, or assisted in the creation of, another act or work. 

SECTION 4. ACT NOT TO BE MISCONSTRUED.

This Act shall not be so construed as to prohibit certain individuals or groups the right to seek credit, and/or financial compensation for, the direct copying of specific works (in the music industry, this act is known as "sampling")

SECTION 5. WHEN EFFECTIVE.

This Act will become effective when signed by the president. 

[FairBol]

Submitting this on behalf of the people of the Republic of Atlasia, and as a Concurrent Resolution.
 

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should enter into negotiations regarding portions of Oklahoma.

Be it resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. TITLE.

This Resolution may be cited as the "Eastern Oklahoma Negotiations Resolution"

SECTION 2. FINDINGS.

A. On July 9, 2020, the Supreme Court (OOC, but regarded as binding for IG purposes) issued a decision in the matter of McGirt v. Oklahoma. At issue was whether Native American lands in the eastern region of the State of Oklahoma were ever disestablished by this body, and thus made part of the territory formerly known as the United States, and now known as the Republic of Atlasia.  More specifically, the matter at hand dealt with the validity of claims made by Native American tribes to lands in Eastern Oklahoma.
 
B. The Native American tribes that are parties to this matter (specifically, the Muscogee/Creek, Cherokee, Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw tribes) may be known as (for the purposes of this resolution) the "Five Tribes of Oklahoma", hereafter referred to as the "Five Tribes".

C.  In a five-to-four majority decision, the Court held that, for the purposes of federal legislation, the lands claimed by the Five Tribes were never disestablished.  Writing for the majority, Honorable Justice Neil Gorsuch said "because Congress has not said (that the lands in question are part of Atlasia), we hold the government to its word".  

D.  The Court's ruling effectively puts the eastern half of the State of Oklahoma into exclusively Native American hands, and out of the jurisdiction of this government.  

E.  According to Article IV, Section II, sub-section 1, clause 7 of the Constitution of Atlasia, the President of Atlasia has the power

"to make treaties, with the advice and consent of the Senate"

.

F.  The proper remedy for this matter is to, (in partnership with the Five Tribes), draw up a treaty which (when enacted) will return the lands in question to the jurisdiction of Atlasia.  

SECTION 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

A.  It is the sense of this Congress that:

1.  The President should, by presentation of a diplomat of his choosing, immediately enter talks with representatives of the Five Tribes.  

2.  The stated purpose of these talks should be the return of now Native American lands in the eastern portion of Oklahoma to Atlasian control, as exercised by and for the regions, states, and people.

3.  If such negotiations are successful, and duly ratified by representatives of the Five Tribes, the President shall present any proposed treaty to the Senate, for possible ratification.

SECTION 4. WHEN EFFECTIVE.

This resolution shall become effective when passed by Congress.  

[FairBol]

Ah, here's what I was looking for; public submissions.  Can I get a bill sponsor?

A Bill

Ensuring fairness regarding payment of winnings at gaming facilities

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1 - TITLE

This bill may be cited as the "Fair Play in Gaming Act of 2021".  


SECTION II - DEFINITIONS  

1. The term "gaming machine" is hereby defined as any device which, as installed at a non-Native American operated casino, purports to pay out any jackpot or sum of money.  

2. The term "malfunction" is defined as a failure of a gaming machine's operating system which renders the game unplayable.  

3. The term "violation" is defined as the refusal of a non-Native American operated casino to pay out any sum that is legitimately won (subject to the terms of this bill).  


SECTION III - FINDINGS

1. Congress finds as follows:

  A. There have been numerous instances of casinos that have refused to award advertised jackpots to winners of such.

  B. In the majority of these cases, such refusals are based upon claims of gaming machines having "malfunctioned".  In this regard, casinos claim that devices mistakenly and erroneously show the winning of a prize.  

  C. Mechanical breakdowns of slot-based gaming machines are extremely rare in occurrence.  

  D. In the event of a legitimate win, casinos should pay amounts that they advertise as potentially being paid.  


SECTION IV - GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. In order to ensure the good working order of gaming machines, inspections of such shall take place every six months.  The gaming commissions of individual states shall be charged with the operation and oversight of these inspections.  

2. In cases of legitimate jackpot wins, casinos shall pay at least the amount advertised as the "maximum jackpot", excepting cases where a malfunction or player fraud is conclusively proven.  

3. Any casino subsequently required to pay a jackpot shall begin payments of funds no later than one hundred twenty (120) days after a claim of victory.  

4. Nothing in this bill shall be construed as requiring jackpot payouts from Native American-operated casinos.  


SECTION V - PENALTIES

1. A casino found to be in violation of Section IV sub-section 2 shall have its gaming license suspended for no less than ninety (90) days.  

2. Thereafter, for every thirty (30) days that a casino continues to be in violation of Section IV sub-section 2, no less than thirty (30) days shall be added to the suspension of such a casino's gaming license.  

3. If a casino continues to be in violation of Section IV sub-section 2 for a period exceeding one (1) year, the associated state gaming commission may choose to permanently suspend the casino's gaming license.  


SECTION VI - IMPLEMENTATION

1. This legislation shall take effect immediately after passage.  

[FairBol]

A RESOLUTION
Honoring the life and career of broadcaster Vin Scully.

WHEREAS, Vincent Edward Scully was born on November 29 1927, and died on August 2, 2022;

WHEREAS, Scully’s voice was a part of radio and television sports telecasts for sixty-seven years;

WHEREAS, his memorable calls have become ingrained as part of not only the history of Major League Baseball and the National Football League, but of culture in general;

WHEREAS, Scully’s loyalty to the Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers, as well as his outstanding work ethic, are qualities to be admired and celebrated;

WHEREAS, Scully was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on November 22, 2016;

WHEREAS, Scully honorably served his country in the United States Navy;

WHEREAS, Scully was devoted to his family and his faith; and

WHEREAS, the signature introduction of Scully will reverberate for years to come (“it’s time for Dodger baseball! A very pleasant good afternoon to you, wherever you may be”);



RESOLVED, That the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia –

  (1) hereby honors the life and career of Vincent Edward Scully;

  (2) mourns the loss of a great American and Atlasian; and


  (3) respectfully directs the Senate Clerk to transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution to –

    (a) the family and next of kin of Mr. Scully;

    (b) the Chairman and principal ownership partner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, Mr. Mark Walter;

    (c ) the General Manager of the Los Angeles Dodgers, Mr. Brandon Gomes; and

    (d) the National Baseball Hall of Fame, Cooperstown NY.

---

SOURCE:

 1. “Vin Scully.” Wikipedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vin_Scully. Accessed 3 Aug. 2022.

[FairBol]

Throwing my two cents in as to this bill: Terminate Cyberdyne Act

It is logical (so to speak) for people to be wary of the capabilities of AIs.  After all, we've always been told that someday, they will replace humans in many positions.  Nevertheless, I don't think playing to fear by passing a bill such as this is a good idea. 

And has anyone considered the possible benefits of AI? It appears to be quite useful in terms of curing "writer's block", and suggesting new ideas.  One could even claim that it is helpful in the area of comprehension, and clearly stating what someone means to say. 

Also, if someone wishes to use an AI to help them write bills, etc....I really don't see anything wrong with that. 

Depictions to the contrary notwithstanding, AI is not a "Manhattan Project"; that is, you won't find anyone quoting Oppenheimer when speaking of it (see reference below). 

To summarize, I believe that the passage of this bill would do more harm than good, and I urge its defeat. 



REFERENCE: In a now famous interview, J. Robert Oppenheimer (he of the creation of the atomic bomb) once said that upon the first successful detonation, he thought of a line from Hindu scripture: "now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds"


PS: For those wondering, I wrote this myself, without any assistance from AI.