Slashdot Mirror


Ask Jamie Love, Consumer Technology Activist

Jamie Love is head of the Ralph Nader-founded Consumer Project on Technology [CPT], one of the first groups to advocate Linux use in government and corporate settings. CPT also works to loosen or remove patent restrictions that raise the end user cost of technologies ranging from computer software to AIDS medication, and against intellectual property laws and treaties that could hamper new technology development. Jamie is one of the most respected technology lobbyists in Washington, even though his entire annual budget probably wouldn't buy a month's worth of lunches for Microsoft's PR firm. What's it like in the lobbying trenches? What can you do to help? Jamie's the one to ask. One question per post, please. 10 of the highest-moderated ones will go to Jamie by email, and we'll run his answers as soon as he gets them back to us.

8 of 212 comments (clear)

  1. Open Source Future by the_ph0x` · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We have obviously come a long way in the name of open source and public education about the need to understand the software you use. However it doesn't seem to have mutch of an effect on the people that count. It truely is a 'way of thinking' and it seem that it is quite difficult to change the way people think.

    In your opinion and observations, what if any future do you see for the open source movements place in the world and its impact on societys ways of thinking?

    .ph0x

    --

    ---
    ps -aux | grep mind
  2. Free Speech by Nexus+Maelstrom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a University student currently involved with a student group called the Campus Democracy Collective, what is the best way to inform both my peers and goverenment representative that the fight for speech, liberty and freedom from oppression will be fought over bits and bytes, and not how many miles per gallon their car will get?

  3. Are Patents being overturned? by kryzx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's been much discussion here, and there is a wealth of info on the CPT site, regarding patents. Some seemingly obvious, some so vague that they include nearly everything, some claiming "invention" of a on-line version of a long-standing business practice, etc. And it appears that the only way any of these patents can be revoked is through court action.

    My question is, what level of success has there been in fighting these patents? Who has expended the effort and funds to take a shot at them? Who has succeeded, who's failed, and what's the outlook for the future?

    --
    "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
  4. Consumerism == Big Government == Opression by brsett · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Consumerism is a simple form of a protectionist government. Doesn't protectionist government invariably lead to the infringement upon personal liberties? Doesn't it also lead to a more litigious society?

    A simple scenario, in order to protect consumers, you may choose to make all cars come with airbags, and have the safety of a Camry. A) What if I'm poor, and cannot afford a Camry, but I can afford a Geo. Am I SOL, or does the goverment buy me a Camry (Socialism)? B) I'm not afraid of death and I like 1960's sports cars, with horrific safety ratings (Corvairs, e.g.). Will I be able to obtain one (keeping in mind that if I die, my family would retain the right to sue the manufacturer under many protectionist schemes)?

    (One can easily draw up a similar scenario with cigarettes to see how I made up these examples).

  5. consumers and quality by tim_maroney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ralph Nader's consumer advocacy has always been first and foremost about quality, of which safety is a subset. Given that the commercial operating systems (MacOS and Windows) are much more user-friendly than the current slate of Linux offerings, and that even many Linux advocates have now come around to admitting that fact, how does Linux advocacy benefit the consumer? Isn't it strange for a consumer advocacy organization to be advocating a lower-quality product over a higher-quality one?

    Tim

  6. Re:Consequences for Patent Breakers? by Kaki+Nix+Sain · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Don't be so melodramatic.

    In reference to the AIDS plague, no one is talking about taking away all patient privileges for all pharmaceuticals. Reducing the privilages a bit in some very particular and well-defined situations won't bring the whole industry to a halt. The large number of people that will die fullfills the burden of proof on the side of reducing the privileges, your burden of proof is a detailed economic impact study of such a limited change in the system. Until you have that in hand, spreading FUD about the end of the industry is unjustified.

    For more of my take on this issue, see this post on k5.

    --

    (C) Kaki Sain, 2011. By reading this, you have illegally copied my property to your brain.

  7. Who owns the law? by ccarr.com · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Jamie,

    Before becoming a developer I was a law librarian, and I had the pleasure of seeing you debate a representative of West Publishing over the issue of their asserted copyright to reporter pagination. I think this is an issue that Slashdotters would be interested in, but I haven't seen it discussed much here.

    Briefly: West (since bought by Thompson) publishes nearly all court reporters in the US. Courts require page citation to earlier decisions in any documents that parties submit for their consideration. Obviously West can't claim a copyright to the decisions since the courts authored them, but they do assert a copyright to the page breaks in their reporters. So directly or indirectly, each litigant must pay West a license for citing case law.

    It seems to me that this issue in some ways presaged the fair use issues raised by the DMCA. The trend seems to be toward rights without remedies. Yes case law is in the public domain but you can't use it in court. Yes you have a fair use right to digital media, but you can't circumvent technology aimed at thwarting that right.

    My question: do you agree that this is a trend, and do you see it continuing?

    ccarr.com

    --
    I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve. BB
  8. Re:Consequences for Patent Breakers? by Elbows · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not a privilege to create and sell a product. It is a privilege to be granted an artificial monopoly on said product because you invented it.
    Patents and IP in general are not god-given rights (or any other sort of rights). They are privileges, created by governments to further the public good by encouraging innovation. When patents are used to restrict the public good (ie keeping medicine from dying people in Africa), they should be thrown out the window.