Session 2- Varsity

NUDL Workshop #1 2024

Schedule for the Day

9am- Session 1

• Getting to know NUDL
• Icebreaker
• Voting on next year’s topic
• Introduction to this year’s topic

10am- Session 2

• Novice: Debate 101 & intro to the Novice Case
• Varsity: Introduction to the 3 Affirmative Cases

11:30- Lunch

12pm- Session 3

• Novice: Debate strategies- flowing & cross examination
• Varsity: The Off-Case files

Session 2 Agenda

• Icebreaker (5 minutes)
• Part 1: Content Creator Aff/ Neg (20 min)
• Part 2: Pharma Patents Aff/Neg (20 min)
• 5 minute break
• Part 3: Deepfakes Aff/Neg (20 min)
• Part 4: Flowing and Line-by-line (20 min)

Rank fast food fries in order of preference.

1. __________
2. __________
3. __________
4. __________
5. __________

Heads Up- The Varsity sessions are not going to be as interactive as the Novice sessions because we have a LOT of stuff to get through.

​

Feel free to pause me at any moment with questions or comments!

Before we start: let’s do a quick recap of some debate basics

Can anyone remember the 4 parts of an Affirmative Case? (Stock issues)

Parts of an AFF:

• Inherency- a big problem exists in the world
• Plan- the plan the affirmative proposes to solve the problem
• Solvency- why the plan will work
• Advantages/ Harms- what is gained from doing the plan/ OR what bad things will happen if you don’t do the plan

Before you can debate any AFF, you have to understand what their inherency, solvency, and advantages/ harms are

This year, we are going to have 3 AFF cases to choose from for tournaments 1-3

​

For tournaments 4-6, you can run any files you want!

Part 1: Content Creator Aff

What do people already know about this plan?

Background

1. Whenever you make something, it is automatically protected by copyright. So in theory, once you make a TikTok or YouTube video, it is your copyrighted material.
2. BUT when you sign up for platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Twitch, etc. you agree to their terms of service. Usually, this means that you sign over some rights to your “Intellectual Property.” And the platform can use, reproduce, or delete your content without your permission.
3. The “Fair Use Doctrine” is a legal principle in copyright law that allows people to sometimes use copyrighted materials without the permission of the creator.
4. This principle comes from the 1976 Copyright Act and therefore is not specific about how social media content is protected as Intellectual Property.

Let’s walk through this aff together! Pull it up on the NUDL website.

What is the Inherency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Inherency Summary

Right now, copyright laws are not working to protect the work of content creators on platforms like YouTube and Twitch

What is the Plan?

Plan

The United States Federal Government Should Extend the copyright “fair use” doctrine to protect creative expression of online content creators

What is the Solvency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Solvency Summary

The fair use doctrine is a law that CAN protect people from copyright infringement, but it was developed in 1976 and does not account for all the new technology.

Right now, content creators are not protected, and their work can be used or removed from platforms without their permission

What is the first Advantage?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Advantage 1: Activism Summary

1. (Uniqueness) Content creators spread important political messages and help support resistance and revolutions
2. (Link) Content creators help to strengthen democracy by exposing repressive governments
3. (Impact) Tyranny and dictatorship leads to lots of bad impacts (famine, human rights abuses, war)

What is the second Advantage?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Advantage 2: Anti-Discrimination

1. (Uniqueness) White influencers are often stealing the work of minority creators
2. (Link) Copyright laws can protect diverse content creators
3. (Impact/ Framing) Resisting racism is essential- this should be our top priority (in round and outside of the round)

What questions do people have about this AFF?

​

What are people’s thoughts about this AFF?

How could we respond to this AFF on-case?

​

What is the response to the inherency, solvency, and advantages?

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 1)

1. No Inherency (this isn’t a problem): Actually, content creators already own the copyrights to their stuff. It is just that the internet is a hard place to enforce these rules, so changing the rules won’t fix anything.
2. No Solvency (the plan won’t work):
1. Copyrights are a BAD thing. They prevent people from being creative because everyone is so obsessed with who “owns” stuff.
2. Copyrights are not good for content creators. If rules get really strict or it costs money to use people’s content, then people will just start to pirate (steal) content.
3. It is almost impossible to enforce copyrights on the internet- it's too expensive for most people to do, it crosses international borders, and trends make it impossible to tell who was the “first”.

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 2)

• Response to the Activism Advantage:
• Copyrights don’t help political discussions- it causes legal battles over who “owns” ideas instead of people talking openly
• Online activism is BAD- it is all performative and doesn’t get anything done in real life
• Online activism in past movements has not created real change
• Response to the Anti-Discrimination Advantage:
• Copyright laws would make things worse for minority content creators. The only people with the ability to copyright stuff and sue people would be the rich and powerful.

Questions about on-case NEG responses to this AFF?

Part 2: Pharma Patents AFF

What do people already know about this plan?

Background

• Right now, a lot of pharmaceutical drugs are created by private companies (ex. Pfizer, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca)
• The process for developing drugs is expensive and time consuming. It often takes companies 10+ years and hundreds of millions to make a drug. And sometimes, the research they do results in nothing.
• The reason companies are willing to invest this time and money into creating pharmaceuticals is because they hope to gain the patent and the exclusive rights to reproduce the drug.
• When companies hold patents, they are able to be the only one to make a drug, and they can price it high to make a lot of money off of it.

Let’s walk through this aff together! Pull it up on the NUDL website.

Note- If you want to run this AFF, I suggest you highlight it down. You don’t need to read all of every single card! Pick out the important parts.

What is the Inherency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Inherency Summary

Right now, companies spend a lot of money developing new drugs. BUT new rules have taken away some patent protections for drug manufacturing companies. This is leading to 2 big problems: 1) people are raising the prices on drugs to make up for lost revenue, and 2) people don’t want to develop new drugs, so there is not enough medical innovation happening.

What is the Plan?

Plan

The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its patent protections for pharmaceutical research, including bio-equivalencies.

​

(Bio-equivalencies are when two different drugs have similar makeups and outcomes)

What is the Solvency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Solvency Summary

Patents are important because they stop other people from stealing your idea/ recipe (which is a big issue in the pharmaceutical industry).

What is the first Advantage?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Advantage 1: Economy Summary

1. Stability
1. (Uniqueness) Right now, our economy is not very stable
2. (Link) Pharmaceuticals are very important to our economy, but the industry will suffer without patents
3. (Impact) When we have economic instability, we go to war
2. Competitiveness
• (Uniqueness) Our pharmaceutical industry is the global leader right now, but China is trying to catch us.
• (Link) Without patents, China will become the global leader.
• (impact) Without a strong pharmaceutical industry/ “bioeconomy” issues like climate change, food security, and energy security become a problem and we will all die.

What is the second Advantage?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Advantage 2: Science Diplomacy Summary

1. (Uniqueness)- Science diplomacy is low now. (Science diplomacy is when scientists around the world share information and technology, and when we can use our scientific knowledge as a bartering tool)
2. (Link)- Having good intellectual property protections and innovation are important for science diplomacy. If we aren’t developing new technology, no one will want to work with us.
3. (Impact)- Science diplomacy is what has prevented war with Russia and allowed us to fight global diseases. War with Russia or spread of diseases could kill us all.

What questions do people have about this AFF?

​

What are people’s thoughts about this AFF?

How could we respond to this AFF on-case?

​

What is the response to the inherency, solvency, and advantages?

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 1)

• No Inherency (this the problem): Lots of things affect how much drugs cost and whether or not medical innovation happens. The problem is not patents. The problem is that Biden and Congress are doing a bunch of stuff to reduce medical innovation. (The plan doesn’t change the real problem).
• No Solvency (the plan won’t work): Patents are bad because they make drugs way too expensive for normal people to afford. Patents don’t actually do that much to improve innovation- and actually, patents might be BAD for innovation because it allows people to hoard their technology instead of sharing insights that could lead to major breakthroughs

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 2)

• Response to the Economy Advantage:
• Our economy is fine right now and our pharmaceutical industry is strong right now- no need for the plan
• Even when the economy suffers, it’s not that big a deal and doesn’t lead to all the terrible stuff they say will happen.
• Response to the Science Diplomacy Advantage:
• Science diplomacy is already happening
• Science diplomacy isn’t that great- it can actually hurt our ability to be competitive
• All of their crazy impacts are exaggerated

Questions about the Pharma Aff?

Let’s take a 5 minute break!

Part 3: Deepfakes AFF

What do people already know about this plan?

Background

• A “Deepfake” is the use of AI to make it seem like something that never happened actually happened. (Ex. fake videos, pictures, or audios).
• This is a huge problem because a lot of people don’t know how to tell the difference between a Deepfake and reality. So it allows for the spread of misinformation.
• There is an old law called “Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act” which was written wayyy before social media. It says that companies that host “3rd party actors” are not responsible for what those people post. (For example, YouTube isn’t responsible if someone posts a dangerous video).
• BUT the law has changed recently to hold companies accountable for things like sex-trafficking and child pornography.
• This case wants to expand that to hold companies responsible for deepfaked content.

Let’s walk through this aff together! Pull it up on the NUDL website.

Note- If you want to run this AFF, I suggest you highlight it down. You don’t need to read all of every single card! Pick out the important parts.

What is the Inherency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Inherency Summary

Deepfakes are already a threat to democracy. People are spreading crazy information that is influencing elections, and we are unprepared to stop them. Our current regulations are outdated and let people get away with bad behavior.

What is the Plan?

Plan

The United States Federal Government should significantly increase intellectual property protections by amending Section 230 (e)(2) of the Communications Decency Act to hold online platforms liable for deepfaked content.

What is the Solvency?

​

Who are the author(s) on the card(s)? What page(s) is it on?

Solvency Summary

By holding companies accountable for deepfaked content on their platforms, we will encourage them to monitor it and stop the spread of misinformation.

AND if we change section 230, then people can sue companies on the basis of copyright violations (ex. You stole my face/ voice) and force companies to monitor more.

This AFF is unique because it has SIX advantages!

​

Do NOT try to read all 6 advantages. Just pick ~2 you like!

Rapid Fire Advantage Summaries

1. Democracy -- Deepfakes are a deep threat to democracy- it can make candidates look like they did things they didn’t do, it can spread misinformation, and it can discourage people from voting. Democracy is essential to peace and global freedoms.
2. Populism-- Deepfakes are spreading misinformation and driving voters towards “populist” extreme leaders who are not good for democracy.
3. Foreign Interference -- Other countries like China and Russia are using deepfakes to spread misinformation, influence our elections, and convince people around the world of things that are not true and bad for human rights.
4. Racism -- Deepfakes are disproportionately used to target minorities, and they can spread racist misinformation.
5. Economy -- Deepfakes can throw off our stock market and cause economic collapses.
6. Domestic Extremeism -- Because companies are not held liable for information posted on their platforms, a lot of extremism is happening online and pushing misinformation to voters. This can lead to dangerous extremism or terrorism.

In the future (after T3), you can also write your own advantages for this AFF. I think there is a really good case for a feminism advantage since so many deepfakes are used to target and harass women.

What questions do people have about this AFF?

​

What are people’s thoughts about this AFF?

How could we respond to this AFF on-case?

​

What is the response to the inherency, solvency, and advantages?

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 1)

• No Inherency (this the problem): People are already fighting deepfakes and misinformation. Private companies are handling the problem. The plan is not necessary.
• No Solvency (the plan won’t work): The plan doesn’t fix the problem. Deepfakes will always exist. People will find ways to avoid detection. And the AFF is hurting free speech, so the plan will probably get struck down by the Supreme Court anyways. AND companies would pretend they didn’t know and actually make their moderation of content WORSE!

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 2)

• Response to the Democracy Advantage: Misinformation has been a problem since the beginning of time. People just need to pay attention and be careful. Our democracy is fine, and deepfakes can even be used in positive ways for democracy.
• Response to the Populism Advantage: Populism will exist no matter what. Populists are not that big of a problem.
• Response to Foreign Interference Advantage: China and other countries aren’t actually trying to manipulate our elections. Even when they do, they never succeed. This isn’t a big problem.

The Negative Argument Summary (pt. 3)

4. Response to the Racism Advantage: The technology people use to “catch” deepfakes don’t recognize all skintones. So the AFF actually makes things WORSE for people of color.

5. Response to the Economy Advantage: Deepfakes have no real impact on our economy/ stock market

6. Response to Domestic Extremism Advantage: Non-unique- extremism is the root problem- deepfakes are just a symptom. The real problem is our access to guns.

Questions about the Deepfakes Aff?

Part 4: Flowing, Line-by-Line, and Speech Documents

Flowing in Varsity

• Flowing in Varsity is done differently than flowing in Novice
• Rather than having your paper horizontal, you should have your paper vertical
• Use one piece of paper for the case and one piece of paper for each off case position. (Sometimes, people even flow each advantage on its own sheet of paper).

Having different flows for different arguments will help you to give an organized road map to the judge.

​

Ex. “Judge, first I will respond to the case, then I will go on to the disadvantage, then the Kritik”

Flowing is the MOST important thing you can do in a debate round. Even if you have nothing else, you can give a speech 100% off of your flow.

Once you receive a speech doc, you will want to use someone else’s speech time writing your speech. Try to resist that urge. Focus on flowing.

Having an organized flow is ESSENTIAL to winning a debate. Without your flow, you can’t do line-by-line.

What is line-by-line?

Line-by-line Debate

• Line by line debate is being able to go through each argument one by one and explain to the judge why you won that argument.
• “They said… but really…” “Their first argument on the DA is… but our response was…”
• Line-by-line is how you win debates!!
• It is really important to understand the pieces of each argument in order to win a line-by-line debate. You need to know their Inherency, Solvency, Advantages, etc. in order to be able to respond to them.

Speech Documents

Speech Documents

• When you get a giant 100 page AFF/ NEG case document, not everything will be good/ useful/ something you want to read!
• This is where speech documents come in.
• Before each speech, pick out the best/ most relevant cards and copy and paste them into a new speech document.
• You can also write in your analytic arguments (but you don’t have to share those with your opponents).
• Try to organize your speech documents in an order that makes sense- do your offensive arguments first.