CCL Version .68 Has Been Released

Lots of little fixes and modifications:

  • Lots of formatting issues (italics, fonts, etc)
  • Revised section on easements, including conditions for abolishment.
  • revised footnote regarding duress of another’s property to include “AI entities” as well as robots.
  • Clarified general membership procedures and rules.
  • Clarified conditions for legitimate bail-out of a defaulted financial institution.
  • Added new section on “judicial guards” (similar to bailiffs) and their role in settling disputes.
  • Clarified conditions for judicial repeal.
  • Removed assertion that guilty party paying for legal fees is part of their sentence.
  • Clarified what it is adjudicators are paying for when pursuing a search/audit warrant.
  • Revised chronological requirements and majority rules for when jury and judge cannot settle on a verdict.

CCL Version .67 Has Been Released

  • This version implemented alot of the material from Ulex 1.1, including three portions regarding product liability, financial institutions, and contract law. Basically, ALI’s superior resources are used wherever CCL might potentially be deficient or simply says nothing in disputes – but only if those relevant portions don’t contradict CCL to begin with. Think of it as this: you’re building a house and have all the manufacturer’s specific materials to use. But you begin working and then realize something is missing. These portions in CCL basically say “go the lumberyard and get the standard materials, but only if they fit.” This prevents a huge amount of emendations for CCL down the road, and implements the best legal frameworks in existence without compromising CCL’s core (libertarian) principles.
  • A draft section on easements; it needs some work yet, but it’s generally in place.
  • Some procedures have been modified regarding settling disputes. Arbiters are required to implement “pendulum arbitration” when settlement through mediation fails – since it is the most effective procedure.
  • Also another caveat for arbitration: instead of going straight to subpoena if a defendant refuses to participate in arbitration for an aggression – aka by refusing to jointly choose an arbiter, they can choose to have their own arbiter choose with the plaintiff’s arbiter and third arbiter, who will then settle the case. This is a very effective method of judicial procedure since it mitigates arbitration bias.
  • “Addenda” are now “modules.”
  • Because of size, I also moved the entire definitions of “consent” to the chapter on contract law.
  • Also, provided an image of the degrees of consent (express – implied – hypothetical), and specific that CCL does not enforce hypothetical consent.

 

CCL Version .65 Has Been Released

This was a hefty one.

  • Tons of typo fixes and formatting errors.
  • Completely new section on the rules regarding search warrants and audits. That’s a really touchy one, but it follows a strict property rights and non-aggression vision: if the search warrant ends up empty, the one searching and who ordered the search are guilty for trespass, theft, or whatever.
  • Corrected incoherence about geospatial frontier and “homestead ready” property beyond Karman Line.
  • Streamlined a number of titles.
  • Corrected example errors regarding excessive responsive aggression. This involved specifying that “torture” and “enhanced interrogation (ie water-boarding)” constitutes an excessive personal aggression.
  • Clarified some things regarding “bondages,” which are like bonds and mortgages – the debt owed by perpetrators of an aggression to the victim. There still needs to be some clarification there: should criminals be able to transfer their bondage? In other words, if someone was willing to serve 30 years labor bondage on behalf of (say) a convicted third degree murderer, would this be just?
  • Paragraph on presence of Enforcement officers added to section on dispute settlement (sort of like saying guards/bailiffs have to be present not only to ensure things are safe in the courtroom, but that stated CCL procedures are, indeed, being followed).
  • An important exception was added regarding the four step process of dispute settlement for those serious crimes of personal aggression: they skip reconciliation and go to arbitration or if they want, a jury trial right away. It makes no sense to require (for example) a rape victim to make contact with her abuser before being able to proceed to arbitration or a trial.

 

CCL Version .61 Has Been Released

  • Cut out descriptive graphic of cash flows and membership (now posted on website); this was mainly to help readers understand the monetary flow of things.
  • Corrected an error of examples of duress. Added torture and “enhanced interrogation” to list of examples of excessive personal aggression.
  • Added an important exception to the process of settling disputes. Cases of serious crime (personal aggressions with the use of force or duress), like murder, rape, etc., now go to arbitration or jury trial right away. The reasons for this should hopefully be obvious.