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.
From my perspective, it seems that all of the politicians in congress seem to be firmly in the grasp of big business on intellectual property issues. The arrest of Dmity Sklyarov seems to have been at best ignored, at worst praised, by these politicians. Is my perspective a correct one, or are politicians actually aware of the issues and responsive to viewpoints other than those of big business? Are there any particular politicians that seem more receptive (that could potentially campaign and convince others)?
I beleive it was Brazil(? Please correct me) who recently ordered pharma plants to start manufacturing AIDS drugs in violation of U.S. patents. What are the consequences for countries who violate patents like this? Can we take this as a sign that violating a patent in this manner, 'for the public good' so to speak, is going to become more common and acceptable?
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Obviously, the big ticket item is getting the citizenry involved in making changes at a legislative level regarding the liberties that have been traded in the interest of corporate domination. The problem, however, is finding a way to communicate that without spending three days pointing out cases of encroaching corporate control.
Do you have any tips/suggestions on how an average technology enthusiast such as myself can best go about conveying to the every-day public the sense of urgency surrounding technology issues and the reason such issues should be addressed?
It seems that the patent office has, in the last few years, lost their collective mind. Patents are incredibly broad, or amazingly misdirected, like in the case of the patents on human genes. They currently seem to protect only litigous patent holders, not the consumers or anyone else, for that matter. What is your organization doing to change this current patent landscape? Is there anything that can be done?
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?
The entertainment industry appears able to get copyright protection extended as long as they wish. While not as directly related to technology as patent law, copyright law is becomming more of a concern, especially with the recent mess with the DMCA. Is your organization making any efforts to convice congress to return copyright duration to a sane limit, and if so, is there much hope for success?
Surely, the cost of life-saving medications should not be prohibitive. And dozens of ridiculous patent disputes cannot be good for any industry. But without some means of recouping the often crippling cost of development (for example, 1000s of drugs begin the development process and only a handful make it to the consumer) what incentive is there to investigate new ideas?
What will happen to the fields of medicine and information technology if the market for invention dries up?
I think it is pretty obvious to everyone here that technology and intellectual property are things which do not work well with the artificial boundaries of nation-states. What sorts of long term strategies does the CPT have for dealing with intellectual property and technology issues at a global level? I am particularly interested in the issues surrounding IP and tech in developing regions.
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
It seems to me that because copyright is intangible, that the public domain is immeasurable, and because expanding copyright takes no money out of the budget, that IP laws are the pork barrel legislation of the Digital Millennium. Senators and legislators see no problem with enlarging copyright beyond its traditional boundaries, past fair use and first sale, because there is no means of accounting for the theft. Is there a sense in Washington that wrapping new copyright restrictions with a bow and handing them to entertainment conglomerates has no downside politically or economically?
If this is the case, how can we change the climate in Washington to make our representatives accountable for diminishing the public domain and enlarging copyright?
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
Our so-called leaders continue passing laws that usurp the doctrine of fair use. What is your orghanization doing to combat laws like the DMCA and organizations like the RIAA and MPAA and to keep them from legislating away the rights we once took for granted under copyright law?
"You done taken a wrong turn."
-Bill McKinney, in Deliverance
Can you describe what a typical day is for you - for example, do you see Congressmen, how do you influence their voting (finiacal or otherwise), and what do you do when you are NOT on Capitol Hill?
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Mr. Love,
If you are so anti-corporation, and so anti-Microsoft, to the point of publically criticizing them and thier practices, why does the Consumer Project on Technology, and specifically you, Mr. Love, choose to use Microsoft Windows on your office and home machines?
An informed Anonymous Coward
Consumers do not (generally) have these resources availible. They can't buy marketing campaigns, they don't have dedicated lawyers, and they don't have large sums of money to spend on convincing people that their way is the right way. If twenty major corporations want something, they can usually get it. However, twenty consumers would have no effect whatsoever. My question is, what is the most effective way that consumers can voice their opinion in a way that they will be listened to? Obviously, if more people protested the laws, policies and other things that did not benefit the consumer, things might be changed. However, I think that most people (including myself) feel overwhelmed by the fact that their one voice makes little difference.
"Who cares if it doesn't do anything? It was made with our new Triple-Iso-Bifurcated-Krypton-Gate-MOS proccess!"
With much of the world moving towards nomarlized intellectual property laws it seems that the rights of the end users are being removed one by one to make each country "conform better" with trading partners. Is it likly that we may loose such things as fair use in the near future, if we haven't already. Sometimes it seems that people have forgotten the reason for Intellectual property protection (in the US atleast), was to allow the creator to make a profit before it became publicly available, not to profit eternally. If all of this really is happening, what can we do to try and change this "evolution" of law and regulation before it goes to far?
I'm not American, but in recent years I have been boycotting many American corporations due to the influence they have on the US legal system and their seemingly inexhaustable ability to gain any IP law they require. I am seriously concerned by the aparently relentless push by US based coporations to bring an American style Intellectual Property regime to the rest of the world. As a Free Software advocate I find few ideas as repellent as "Software Patents"! My question to you is how do you see the International Intellectual Property arguments going, and ultimatley will we reach a system where everyone is under the thumb of software patents or where the US is forced to give up on this terrible idea?
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
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).
I'm part of the group that's organizing the DMCA protests in Minnesota. We're passing out fliers and staging protests, but haven't managed to get any press. We're also trying to get a face-to-face meeting with our senators...but no luck so far -- their offices haven't even called us back, despite both written and phoned requests for a meeting.
The problem is, we're technology people, not activists, and we don't know how to lobby effectively. What's your advice? How can we get the attention of our senators? How can we attract media attention (in a respectful way, that is)? Are there other activities we should be undertaking that would be more effective than what we're doing?
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
Couldn't you show to all those nice, God-Fearing, apple-pie Bible Belt Moral Majority Republicans how the DMCA helps Scientology silence its critics? Also, the Hollywood connection Scientology has (Travolta, Cruise etc.) makes a nice picture (those smut-peddling godless pornographers from California are in league with an anti-Christian sect to undermine the Constitution for their Satanic profit!!!)
Disclaimer: the above is not necessarily my opinion, but it might be an effective angle. Unless those so-called "Christians" actually value money more than God.