Lack of Clarity regarding Secure Tresspass in New Space Law


Within Secure Trespass’ notes it specifies areas that are “like” telecomms, head offices, security zones, command areas, the vault and armory.

Which leaves a lot of room for interpratation. Is Grav a secure area? Or the research server room? What about AI?

This was all specified within SOP but with the lack of SOP it is now up in the air. A semi-alright lawyer could likely argue his client out of secure tresspass of grav simply because it’s not listed.

I feel a good temporary solution to this would be to list all secure areas in the crime listing.

And a good permanent solution would be a return to SOP

1 Like

What about instead of making a very long list of all secure areas, an encompassing definition of “secure areas” is given?

I think it can be something like this “A secure area is a closed-off area that is critical to station-wide operation and integrity”.

You’re probably going to run into issues of that not covering everything, or covering too much. For example, your wording would mean head offices aren’t secure areas, neither is the vault. I’d prefer just a plain 'ol list.

A list is inevitably going to go out of date as maps change. This isn’t meant to be an argument for leaving unreasonably vague things in space law, but making it so bullet proof that there is only one possible interpretation of things takes away from Space Law being a partially IC thing that lawyers can argue about. It pushes it towards being no different than another list of server rules

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.