Slashdot in Politics?

Michael "Codetalker" Obersnel asks: "I was wondering if anyone out there had any ideas on how to turn all that passionate talk on Slashdot (how I love it) into a political force that people will pay attention to. Like a lobby group or something similar. It seems that people tolerate the DMCA and spam enough to complain about it but not really do anything about. I think we could change that with some organization and a cohesive front. I'm not suggesting that Slashdot itself be responsible, only that the community take part. Like a micro-payment system to hire lawyers for topics we are interested in or some sort of petitioning system. I know I'd pay a buck to overturn the DMCA, free Dimitri, outlaw spam, protest license problems, protect the GPL etc."

Comments

There already is such an organization

[wiredog]

It's called the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Re:There already is such an organization

[supabeast!]

Because that isn't what the EFF wants to do. Lobbying groups operate under very different laws and tax codes than nonprofit groups funding legal help do. If the EFF were to start lobbying, it would drastically change the entire organization.

Lobbying groups also tend to be considered somewhat less credible than politically motivated nonprofits like the EFF. Right now the EFF just helps out the accused and points out some bad laws. Because they are a group of people who could probably be making more money with less hassle doing something else, they get a lot of trust and respect from many people. If the EFF were to start taking donations to lobby politicians, they would be just another group of washington scum getting paid to help politicians buy elections by sucking up to the right people. The EFF would then become the NRA of geek politics, they would get a lot of support, shuffle around a lot of money, but in the long run they would earn quite a bit of disdain from outsiders.

Re:There already is such an organization

[macsforever2001]

The EFF is a non-profit organization. As such, they are prohibited by law from any lobbying activities.

This is an oversimplification and not true. The bottom line is that they can with some restrictions - it also depends on whether or not they receive federal funding. Since the EFF does not, they are not restricted very much. That said, I don't think the EFF should be lobbying because that is not their purpose. I believe, as others have called for, we do need a separate organization for this purpose.

Start with OpenSourceLobby.org

[mikosullivan]

At OpenSourceLobby.org we are working to educate the government about the value of open source. We are a grass roots movement: each member of OpenSourceLobby "owns" his or her congressional representative and is in charge of establishing a relationship with that legislator and educating him or her about open source. We are also writing up fact sheets and talking points to assist lobbyists and other open sourcies in making their case.

We're just getting started, so it's a great time to join in.

UK Campaign for Digital Rights

[dackroyd]

In the UK a group of people have formed the Campaing for Digital Rights (CDR ;), and our web site can be found at http://uk.eurorights.org/

At the moment we are campainging for three things: Consumer Digital Rights,with regard to use-restricted cd's, to free Dmitry Sklyarov and to prevent dumb laws like the EUCD (Europes version of the DMCA) from being passed.

We have held a couple of protests outside the US embassy, to ask for Dmitry to be released, the first of which had a ten minute report on NewsNight, the BBC news review program.

On October the 6th we are going to start our leafletting campaign to raise awareness of the new brain-damaged cd's being released. A copy of the leaflet can be downloaded from http://uazu.net/cd/index.html

Any people looking to take part in the campaign, should join the (now incorrectly named) Free Dmitry UK mailing list, which can be found at http://mailman.xenoclast.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi nfo/free-sklyarov-uk

I'm in a similar situation, except...

[Dan Ost]

Part of the problem is that people don't know who
their elected officials are.

A good place to start is www.congress.org.

You can easily search for your representatives
by simply entering your zip-code.

Hope this helps.

Effective Lobbying

[jgman]

The most effective way to lobby is to make one on one contact with your Representative or Senator. It is actually much easier to meet with your Representative than most people think. If you are travelling to DC, simply call their office and set up a meeting. Explain that you want to discuss Tech Policy. Even if the elected official is unable to meet with you, most offices will set up a meeting with a staffer who specializes in certain issue areas. This staffer is typically called a Legislative Assistant. Be aware that this staffer may have only a rudimentary knowledge of how technology works. They are policy geeks after all, not tech geeks.

If you are not travelling to DC, find out where your Representatives nearest State/District office is located. Contact the staffer at that location and arrange to set up a meeting with the staffer. During the meeting explain that you would like to meet with your Representative the next time they are in the area.

If you are overly shy, write an old fashioned snail mail to your Representative's DC office. Elected officials typically have a policy of responding to all letters. Believe it or not, those officials who do not respond, typically do not get reelected.

DO NOT USE E-MAIL! E-MAIL is the worst way to communicate your concerns. As has been posted on /. in the past, Congress is deluged with tens of thousands of e-mails every month.

Here is a link to find your local Congresscritter

[bubblegoose]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/

Re:Lobbying Congresspeople

[wurp]

You can send a fax to all of your congressmen even easier than you can send an email via aclu.org. If you go to
http://www.aclu.org/action/liberty107.html
at the bottom of the page you will see an option to fax your congressmen. It will figure out who they are based on your physical address and fax them whatever content you enter into their web form.

Here's what I sent to my congressmen:

A second attack on the freedoms of Americans is happening right now, and you're on the front lines. Please help defend my freedom.

I know that times like these compel one to try to do something about it, to fight for our freedoms and security. I can only assume that this urge
is what is driving the current push for laws that ostensibly increase our national security, but in fact restrict our freedoms without measurable increase in security.

You are doing more than your fair share to fight for the American way if you resist the urge to pass oppressive laws in a time of crisis. Please don't let national law be driven by current events. The strength of our nation lies in the freedom it grants its citizens, not the power of the government to control those citizens.

That said, I would like to list some laws which I believe are currently under consideration, and which I feel gravely impact the freedoms on which America is founded. I strongly urge you to vote AGAINST the following legislation:

1) The Mobilization Against Terrorism Act a.k.a. Anti-Terrorism Act proposed by Attorney General Ashcroft. If I understand this bill correctly, it would for example treat computerized graffiti (defacing a governmental web page) as an act of terrorism punishable by life in prison. While defacing government property is obviously a crime, there are already laws on the books with reasonable punishments for these crimes. This bill also appears to violate our ex post facto protections granted by Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.

2) Amendment S.A. 1562 of H.R. 2500, the Combating Terrorism Act, sections 816, 832, 833 and 834. This bill appears to grant broad rights to government agencies regarding computerized wire taps. There are already mechanisms for obtaining the right to a wire tap (warrants). I feel this act is an abridgement of our fourth amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

3) The draft Public Safety and Cyber Security Enhancement Act (PSCSEA). Restrictions on cryptography can only hurt legitimate uses, never criminal or terroristic uses. Cryptographic algorithms are well known and software providing strong encryption is easily obtainable, regardless of US law. If its use is criminalized, will that stop criminals from using it? Also, encrypted communications can NOT be identified if the communicating parties use commonly known methods of steganography. The kind of messages that terrorists would send back and forth could easily be hidden undetectably in any public internet forum, video stream, photograph, sound or other file. Criminalizing encryption will only restrict law abiding citizens from protecting personal and financial information.

4) The draft legislation titled "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" (SSSCA). This law grants unprecented rights to intellectual property holders (including virtually eliminating Fair Use rights, first sale doctrine, and public domain rights). At the same time, it increases the cost of all computer systems and eliminates an entire computing industry founded on openness and freedom. (There is publicly available software which allows one to operate a computer while legally paying no license fees. This software and any like it would be untenable since anyone could alter the program to disable the copy protections required under the SSSCA. This software (Linux) is an incredible boon to students, non-profit organizations, and low income users everywhere.)

I am a computer software developer. Intellectual property is my livelihood. Please follow the guidelines given by the founding fathers in our Constitution with respect to IP. The limited monopoly on intellectual property is a sacrifice we make to satisfy the real goal.

From the US Constitution: "To promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." The goal of intellectual property rights is to promote the progress of science and useful arts, not to guarantee income in perpetuity.

How you vote affects how I vote. Please help protect the freedom of American citizens.

Here is a list of articles further enumerating the concerns about current legislation: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/257
http://www.aclu.org/action/liberty107.html
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/hollings.090701. ht ml
http://www.eff.org/alerts/20010921_eff_wiretap_a le rt.html

Sincerely,

Bobby Martin, CEO NavTools Inc.

Re:Because no one here exerts any effort..

[hotseat]

Congresspeople and other politicans pay attention to three things: (1) manually typed, manually signed letters from registered voters with reasonable arguments and tone (2) contributions of $$$ (the more the better, but any amount gets attention) (3) contributions of manhours.

Disclaimer: I just answer these letters, I don't actually make policy...

We don't care if letters are posted, faxed, emailed or if people ring in. In either case we'll read 'em, log 'em and you'll get a letter back (love the franking privilege). You don't have to manually type it, though we prefer people who make an effort to write their own letters rather than paying a company to fax us on any issue the company feels is important (that's just evil).

If you don't want to write by hand, there's a web form at www.house.gov/writerep/ to work out zip->representative and send an email. If your rep doesn't like email, WriteRep will tell you.

Be careful with cash, as well - it's not legal to receive campaign contributions on federal property so sending $50 to Washington offices is a bit icky.

Basically, as a constituent you'll get decent treatment, and there's probably nothing you can put in your letter to make it get in front of your representatives themselves. If the staffer thinks it's an important enough issue (or if the volume is high enough) then action will be taken.

HTH,
Tom

There IS a party who wants to help everyone

[dada21]

Its called the Libertarian party.

This is a group who wants to repeal copyright law to its basic elements of 7+7 years maximum.

This is a group who wants total freedom of speech, bar none.

This is a group who wants to repeal laws that give corporations limited liability, so that CEOs and other officers are guilty for crimes committed that break the law.

This is a group who wants the government out of our lives, entirely. Full privacy, full ownership of your land property.

This is a group that believes that the only reason "big business" got there is because of government subsidies -- and they're right.

This is a group that wants each and every person in this country to be responsible for their actions, bar none. If you do something stupid, you will learn by paying the consequences, and no public organization will help you. Private organizations will help, but those kind of systems will watch your recovery closely, and shut you off if you keep screwing up.

This is a group that wants non-violent crimes repealed. We want to let two adults do what they want with each other, as long as they hurt no one else.

This is a group that wants to let you do business with any person in any country, with no tariffs, embargoes, or other limitations.

This is a group that wants to get rid of the income tax and all other taxes that eat up 50% of your income each and every day. This will double your available income so you can decide what to do with it.

This is the only group who has NEVER changed their position in the 30 years they have been together.

This is a group who has ONE Congress in office for many years (Congressman Ron Paul, http://house.gov/paul ) a guy who has voted the Libertarian way each and every time. A guy who has never been corrupted by the political system, because he stands by his beliefs, and always has. The proof is there that the philosophy WORKS.

Lastly... This is a group that got 1.7 million votes in Congress in the 2000 election. No other third party in HISTORY has ever even broken 1 million votes.

http://lp.org/ Go there today. Make a difference. Kick the careerists out.

A few statistics

[rjh3]

Consider the following:
DMCA comments - 300 people wrote or emailed responses during the public comment period.
HIPAA comments - 40,000 people wrote or emailed responses to the Health Privacy regulations during the public comment period.
Home Schooling - Over 500,000 people (mostly opponents) wrote physical letters when government regulations of home schooling were proposed.

These things matter. Your letters matter. Hardcopy physical mail matters most. This is how politicians judge their constituent opinions.

Your congressman and senator has local office visiting times and DC visiting times. Have you ever visited? How about your state representatives? (I visited mine to make sure that if UCITA was brought up that she would know that at least one constituent was opposed.) They try to make these visits easy.

Have you ever been to a political fund raiser? (it is very different and rather entertaining.) Have you ever donated money to the local politicians who support your views? They keep track of these things. A few afternoons or evenings, your name on their mailing list, and a few dollars makes quite a difference. You cannot buy their vote for this, but it makes your opinions an important part of their determination of the public opinions that matter to them. Are your positions worth that effort?

If you care, get out and work with these people.

/. has no single voice

[slim]

I don't think this idea makes sense because I don't think Slashdot has ever had a single coherent voice (and it would be duller if it did).

It bothers me when the /. "community" is stereotyped as pro-Linux (I am, many are not), Anti-MS (I see plenty of Windows users here now), Libertarian (a lot of the libertarianism here, esp. wrt gun control, goes too far for my liking), anti-IP (there are plenty of dissenting voices on copyright)...

No, Slashdot hosts heterogenous set of views. If you want to support a particular political agenda, get with a more singleminded organisation, one per issue. The EFF might be a good start, as might the FSF. Or the NRA if you're that way inclined.

Other ways geeks might influence their national politics is through running services like Britain's faxyourmp.org.uk -- the site was prompted by opposition to the RIP bill (privacy stuff) but now it addresses parliament's accountability, and public political apathy by making it easy for a constituent to contact their MP even if they don't know what constituency they live in or who their MP is (as is worryingly common).

I am a Lobbyist in Washington D.C.

[morganew]

As the subject states, I am a lobbyist with a firm here in Washington D.C. (you can look me up at opensecrets.org); and while much of the discussion here has the roots of a good ideas, there are some inconsistencies I have seen that should be corrected:

1. Creating an organization that can hire a lobbyist and Political Action Committee (PAC) are completely different things. A PAC is set up with the intent to pool and distribute campaign contributions to Members of Congress. Any organization can hire a lobbyist. There are some restrictions on using appropriated dollars to fund a lobbyist (commonly referred to as the Byrd rule) but otherwise, hiring a lobbyist is not a hard thing.

2. Hiring a lobbyist is expensive/cheap. You can find younger lobbyists that have recently left the Hill and are hungry to work hard for a relative pittance... but they may lack the access you need to compete against other interests. Some firms limit their monthly retainers to a minimum of $20,000 a month, others take interesting clients for much less. The costs really depend on how broad the issues dealt with are, how toxic you will become to other potential clients, how many hours the effort will take, what are the expenses (copies, dinners, cabs are important for tiny retainers) associated with it and so on.

3. Congress is already "bought" by big business. Patently not true, but I will say that the large telecommunications, software and entertainment industries have taken the time to express their concerns to Members of Congress, and to present information that suggests that, among other things, should their industry be harmed by the amorphous "open source" movement, there will be a loss of jobs in the respective congressperson's district.

4. Congress has turned a deaf ear on electronic freedom. Also not true, Congress knows of the issues, but frankly the other side makes a much more compelling case. Additionally, I do not believe some of the organizations who do work for the policies most of you express concern about operate in a politically savy mode. I know I may be shooting myself in the foot here, but I personally came up with an effective method to combatting the cybernanny software in libraries, and suggested the idea to a head of one of the non-profs here in town. Unfortunately they were so overwhelmed with issues and underwhelmed with cash, nothing was done with it. Some organizations tend to show a "zealot" side, which is not always an effective way to advocate a position.

Finally, why would an effective lobbyist work on behalf of the concepts expressed on slashdot? To get a lobbyist who knows the Members and staff of the Judiciary committee and the Commerce committee will require finding someone who probably already has connections with organizations that would oppose the "slashdot movement". Why would he make himself toxic and decrease his/her ability to put food on the table for his family for a movement that will cost him hours of time with a likely tiny reward?

For a more complete discussion of Washington, check out my other post at Tech savvy but world dumb is the root of the issue