Measure of a Man: The solution.

[Timo]

Would the UFP be inclusive and generous with citizenship? There would supposedly be folks interested in getting citizenship; would there exist a need to manage the inflow?

We know Nog needs extra help getting to Starfleet because he's not a citizen. So why not become a citizen first, and dodge the obstacles that way? Apparently there is effort involved in getting the blue passport, and even people interested in doing business with the UFP and permanently residing on an UFP-managed outpost don't feel the need to get it in order to conduct said business.

Data might need ambition and initiative in order to become a UFP citizen. And he might have had none, for the first decade or two of his conscious existence.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[at Quark's]

Data might need ambition and initiative in order to become a UFP citizen. And he might have had none, for the first decade or two of his conscious existence.

There's a point to that. Being the trailblazer of a new group could mean he'd have to fight for it. It might become a lot easier for other androids that would come after him once he had won that fight.

 

[Timo]

Or then not, considering the wide range of androids we have seen in the show, most of those preceding Data by far. Any biped that walks to the desk and demands the entry forms would face the same struggle, more or less - some might have faces of steel, others would have faces of tentacles or warts, and the clerk would always have to suppress his gag reflex and personal bigotry. This would happen every day, and we can tell the precedent doesn't help the individual cases. Just like most precedent never does, in our diverse world.

Holograms are more of a categorical novelty in this timeframe, so one of 'em becoming a citizen might sway public opinion or legislation. But some of the EMH's adventures highlight how holograms come in a broad range, and most people would know them as mindless tools of entertainment to begin with...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Skipper]

The more we discuss among ourselves, the more I am convinced that she underestimated the matter at first and after a while she realized what she was getting into. Let us remember then that Maddox had the support of admirals. If he hadn't been convinced of her judgment, well, he could have put her through a rough time. It started as a trivial affair (in her opinion) where she could take a petty little revenge on Picard and became potentially something that could destroy her career, no matter what decision she made. If nothing else, she probably regretted not declaring herself not competent from the start.

 

[DonIago]

While I think Louvois was definitely a bit snotty toward Picard, I'm not at all convinced that she acted with malice toward him at any point, though it has been awhile since I've seen the episode.

 

[Skipper]

While I think Louvois was definitely a bit snotty toward Picard, I'm not at all convinced that she acted with malice toward him at any point, though it has been awhile since I've seen the episode.

I'm half joking, really, but in hindsight the only two options are:

1. she is in bad faith
2. she is totally incompetent

Let's remember, the first time when she decided in favor of Maddox, she didn't even deign to talk to Data. She obviously wasn't an AI expert, but she quickly established, without consulting anyone, that an obscure 21st century law applied to this case. And remember that during the hearing NO ONE proved whether the "Acts of Cumberland" could be applied or not in this particular case.

 

[Swedish Borg]

Using that logic Data has feelings. He can also call for help if attacked.

Your car alarm can go off. In a way, it's like calling for help, yet that doesn't make your car alive.

 

[DonIago]

I'm half joking, really, but in hindsight the only two options are:

1. she is in bad faith
2. she is totally incompetent

Let's remember, the first time when she decided in favor of Maddox, she didn't even deign to talk to Data. She obviously wasn't an AI expert, but she quickly established, without consulting anyone, that an obscure 21st century law applied to this case. And remember that during the hearing NO ONE proved whether the "Acts of Cumberland" could be applied or not in this particular case.

Well, if assume Louvois isn't totally incompetent, then might we also assume that the Acts of Cumberland are in fact a reasonable precedent, even if the reasoning is unclear to us? And it is an initial ruling, in the end; one that Picard is able to challenge simply by stating he wishes to do so. I suspect a lot of figures in the judiciary, if asked to rule on a matter that they don't consider especially controversial, might act in a similar manner. Find a precedent that seems to meet the circumstances and call it a day, at least until someone lodges a protest.

 

[Swedish Borg]

Well, if assume Louvois isn't totally incompetent, then might we also assume that the Acts of Cumberland are in fact a reasonable precedent, even if the reasoning is unclear to us? And it is an initial ruling, in the end; one that Picard is able to challenge simply by stating he wishes to do so. I suspect a lot of figures in the judiciary, if asked to rule on a matter that they don't consider especially controversial, might act in a similar manner. Find a precedent that seems to meet the circumstances and call it a day, at least until someone lodges a protest.

That's not the way to behave in a civilized society. What if the person is weak, or has lost all their memories, or has a low IQ, or is in a coma, are you going to summarily rule against them... "until someone lodges a protest"? In a civilized society, defenseless people should not be sacrificed. But I guess Starfleet is not really a civilized society, that would explain why they put into law that if you see people die you are forbidden to help them under the threat of being court-martialled.

 

[DonIago]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment

 

[Swedish Borg]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment

Well, I guess I should be grateful that I live in a place where such things are not done.

 

[at Quark's]

Of course, the central narrative theme of the episode is a great idea (discuss whether the android should have the same rights as humans). It's just that too much of the already established setting has to be shoehorned to make the narration possible. (We need to have this debate now even though the setting already established Data was admitted into and completed Starfleet Academy long ago. It needs to fit into a single episode, so we 'invent' some flimsy reasons why it's urgent (Maddox' research) and why it couldn't be handled off-ship using the proper channels, but instead have Our Heroes play prominent roles (new sector, without sufficient juridical structure yet). We need to add a bit more tension, so we have to somehow make it believable that the judge is initially somewhat adversarial to Picard's point of view and then swayed, so in order to do that we give them a bit of history with a lot of tension (small universe syndrome), so we give Picard a court-martial in his past and made her prosecute him with more zeal than her job warranted, and we make her seemingly either incompetent or prejudiced to an opinion using some obscure three centuries old act, all to serve the story.

Well, the list goes on and on, but I think the idea is clear. There is a remarkable resemblance to those projects at work that start like great ideas (and in potential truly are), and that seem to be neatly executable at first, but that get messier and messier as the practical implementation runs into more and more little snags.

 

[Skipper]

The original sin of this episode is the use of what we might call a "narrative macguffin": the use of the "Acts of Cumberland" to justify the fact that Data cannot be considered human. The problem is that we are never told exactly what these "Acts" consist of, so the characters find themselves having to talk about nothing. Likely, as this obscure piece of legislation underpins the JAG decision, the parties to the dispute should have explained why in their opinion the law applied / did not apply to the case in question.

Also there is another problem that is overlooked in the episode. Virtually the only thing we are told about this law is that it regulates the property rights of Artificial Intelligence. The problem is that property is one of the most complex issues in law. Even if she was right, why should Starfleet be the sole owner of him? And the legislation of the colony where they found it? And any relatives of Soon? Just untangling this tangle would take YEARS.

 

[Timo]

Then again, "property being complicated" might be one of the things cleared away when money "went the way of the dinosaur". Now that money has become birds, we also hear that people work for self-improvement. Yet we hear precious little about the value of property, be it physical or intellectual: those with a profit motive appear to be outside the Federation, if not otherwise, then through being recluses, fugitives or counterculture fanatics.

Might be there is little option but to refer to outdated legislation when issues of possession arise.

As for the idea that Data's legal position requires examining, the plot rather preempts that, by establishing that Data needed no legal position in order to become a Starfleet officer of no known special status or dispensation. But in addition to shooting itself in the foot, it sort of caters for sequels as well: if nothing really gets sorted out even when there is a trial, Data is going to have interesting times ahead of him. Essentially, we get universe-building: in this universe, strange new life faces an uphill struggle to get recognized, even if Starfleet is a safe haven for misfits and allows them to grow. An extension of the "everything but the heroes is evil or incompetent" setup which got scaled back and forth in the TOS movies where Starfleet either was or wasn't part of said "everything"; and a good introduction to the subsequent setup where top officers are corrupt and only certain parts of Starfleet are a true bastion of freedom and justice.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Skipper]

Then again, "property being complicated" might be one of the things cleared away when money "went the way of the dinosaur". Now that money has become birds, we also hear that people work for self-improvement. Yet we hear precious little about the value of property, be it physical or intellectual: those with a profit motive appear to be outside the Federation, if not otherwise, then through being recluses, fugitives or counterculture fanatics.

But the concept of property still exists. Maybe something has ceased to have monetary value, but it can have artistic or emotional value. Kivas Fajo was explicit called a thief. And at the end of the episode all the items he stole from others have been confiscated and are now being returned to their "rightful owners". I think that "rightful owners" are the key words here. Somehow it must be decided whether someone has the "right" to "own" something. Who decides it? How? And how the JAG decided that Starfleet was the rightful owner of Data?

 

[Timo]

This is where things get really tangled up: how can an item such as those collected by Fajo hold value when having a truly identical copy is possible, to the degree that both are the original?

(Making copies of Data might not be complicated at all; just press a button in your industrial replicator. But having two Datas would just mean more trouble for Maddox, who would now have two opponents in his fight for vivisection. He doesn't want more Datas - he wants to learn how to build Datas.)

But when everything ownable is available in infinite quantity (that is, free of the concept of quantity), then every property issue becomes directly comparable to the intellectual property issues of today. Defining "owner" might become more important than ever, then, since definition has to be a purely legal one, without the crutches of the whereabouts or provenience of a piece of matter.

Defining ownership of Data might then plausibly hinge on rules laid down for ownership of AI, with all other aspects being irrelevant. That is, until somebody manages to pigeonhole the case as something else, say, through declaring Data a person or a historical landmark or a crime in progress or whatever.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[DonIago]

As for the idea that Data's legal position requires examining, the plot rather preempts that, by establishing that Data needed no legal position in order to become a Starfleet officer of no known special status or dispensation.

Not necessarily true. Data refers to a committee that evaluated him before he was allowed to join Starfleet. We don't know whether this committee carried legal weight per se, but it certainly seems as though its decision might be considered setting a precedent. Maddox was a member of said committee and opposed letting Data join Starfleet (ironic given Data's joining Starfleet came close to working in his favor).

Louvois' initial decision, then, might be construed as a rebuttal to the committee's decision.

Or, more cynically, one could argue that the committee wanted Data to join Starfleet precisely because it would lend additional weight to any future arguments that he should be considered property.

Did Data realize the full, potential implications of his joining Starfleet, in that the situation that occurs in this episode became a possibility? How many people who join the military in contemporary times later realize that they agreed to things that they didn't realize they were agreeing to?

 

[Skipper]

I was thinking another example which show that the concept of possession isn't total immaterial in the Star Trek universe. In New Ground Alexander steals a lizard model. Now, Miss Kyle could replicate this model how many times she wanted. She could literally fill the corridors of the Enterprise of lizard models at not cost. Still, she (nicely) demanded the model back. And Work was very angry when found what happened. So, taking something that isn't yours is still considered something wrong, even if that something has absolutely no material value. And so the future of Star Trek is not a kind of hippie super community where everything belongs to everyone, but where the concept of personal property still exists, regardless of the intrinsic value of the object.

 

[Swedish Borg]

I was thinking another example which show that the concept of possession isn't total immaterial in the Star Trek universe. In New Ground Alexander steals a lizard model. Now, Miss Kyle could replicate this model how many times she wanted. She could literally fill the corridors of the Enterprise of lizard models at not cost. Still, she (nicely) demanded the model back. And Work was very angry when found what happened. So, taking something that isn't yours is still considered something wrong, even if that something has absolutely no material value. And so the future of Star Trek is not a kind of hippie super community where everything belongs to everyone, but where the concept of personal property still exists, regardless of the intrinsic value of the object.

The problem is a general sloppy lack of coherence. In one episode Jake has no money to buy his dad a gift (because the federation doesn't use money) but then Sisko buys a rather sizeable piece of land on Bajor (which must have cost a lot of money). So either Sisko has been doing some trafficking on the side or there is something really wrong here.

 

[DonIago]

Sisko may have gotten the Emissary Discount package.