Slashdot Mirror
Questions for Town Meeting with Congressman?
tongue asks: "I have
the opportunity tomorrow to go to a town meeting with my Congressman, Gene Taylor (D, Miss.). I'd
like to be able to ask several (preferably intelligent) questions
regarding issues facing the technology industry today, on
bills like the DMCA, SSSCA, etc; but I'm having trouble narrowing
down the field. The research I've been able to do so far indicates
a fairly conservative voting record, although I haven't had much luck
finding a good site that summarizes a bill-by-bill voting record along with a synopsis of the bill." We did a similar question, last month about the CBDTPA which dovetails nicely with this issue. What questions about these and other questionable electronic laws passed over the last few years, would you like tongue to ask Senator Taylor?
If so, how much money, exactly, did you receive from the entertainment "industry"? (Be sure to have the figures from the FEC handy when he doesn't know/remember.)
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
He's a US Representative, not a Senator. Didja
follow the link submitted?
mmmmmm democracy in action
How do they evaluate the consequences of the bills before voting on them?
It seems to me that this is an area in which they are sorely lacking.
Senator, what do you believe constitutes "fair use" of an intellectual property product, such as a DVD, computer game, etc. Do you believe people should be able to make back-up copies of such products?
I'm the stranger...posting to
Ask him if he sells out the American public to corporations that bribe-- er..."contribute to his campaign."
Maybe I'm just bitter, but at this point I'm convinced that all politicians are crooks.
Senator, since the main effect of lengthening the period of copyright and patent protection seems to be to stifle competition, when do you think we will see a move back to the principles established by the framers of the constitution and a _shortening_ of the protection period?
Someone can write this question better and more accurately than me I am sure, but a question to that effect might be interesting to hear answered.
I had a chance to "shadow" ( read, "follow around" ) a senator for NYS a few months ago. Basically, my advice to you is: be very specific with your questions. Do this for two reasons: it assists with their answer, and if a question is broad, they won't answer it. From what I gather, politicians don't like to say anything broad, unless they're trying to get out of a sticky situation. So give a specific question, and demand a specific answer.
;) he does have a tough job. Even if he is as currupt as Swiss Cheese, show him some respect. He deserves it.
Also, don't insult the man. Believe it or not (don't listen to most Slashdot readers
And lastly, if he does refuse to answer a question, find out why. If he's got a good reason, move on - don't try and punch the heck out of him, or he won't be forthcoming in the future. If he constantly refuses to answer questions, however, politely show your displeasure and remind him that he works for you.
Hope that helps - good luck!
--
http://nemilar.net - Not your grandmother's soup kitchen
It's always seemed to me that eula's are completely one sided. They impose restrictions on consumers with no appropriate standards placed back upon the sellers. How about passing some legislation on restricting eula's. A good starting point would be this:
http://www.cexx.org/svla.htm
Ask him why he isn't doing more to stop the pirating of children's storybooks?
Doesn't he know that if parents keep trading these books on Napster the authors will go hungry and find another line of work? If kids aren't reading, then they'll be on the street at night, we'll need a program of Midnight Storytelling to save the children.
If you think these townhall meetings are forums to pursuade or convince your Congressman of *anything*, you will be pretty disappointed.
These things are primarily designed to get a nice story in the local paper, and maybe help a few people with "The road near my cousin's house is falling apart" or "I'm getting the runaround from can you help?"
If you are serious about garnering insight or pursuading your congressman of anything beyond the superficial, you need to set up a private meeting with him or one of his staff. (This is not a difficult thing to do, and contrary to the press, you do not need to be a millionaire contributor to do it.)
At the said meeting, you need to have a concise argument ready, provide facts, figures, and documentation. ("I hate Microsoft and think everyone should use BSD" will not cut it.)
Please be knowledgable about your subject. The fact that you're dredging Slashdot for talking points is not a good sign, and will likely do more harm than good when the conversation gets into specifics and fine details. Remember, the idea is to convince, not just spout off your opinion.
Technology issues are a huge body of legislation, and you will more than likely find at least somebody on his staff with experience in such matters, who will be the true path to action. (Staffers are the key to power.)
I can promise you that any townhall grandstanding about any substantive issue will result in a noncommittal "That's really good point, and there are a lot of people who agree with you. Let me look into it."
Pomme de Terre
"Mr Senator...boxer or briefs? Choice of cigar?"
Really, can these recently-submitted "Ask Slashdot" questions get any sillier and unimportant? Probably.
Voting record of Mr. Taylor on ACLU issues
ACLU's Voting Record
Before you go, you should figure out if he received money from any special interest group or corporation. If he's been bought, a good followup question could be "Do you feel that there is a conflict of interest in making a statement on this issue, when you received $xx.xxx from yyyyyyy inc?".
Stop the brainwash
You'll get to ask one question, she'll glandhand you over it and then move on to "more important things" like "saving the children from internet rapists" and "fighting terrorism".
"Mr. Congressman, I slept with you wife last week, and now I have these ichy boils, I was wondering if you could elaborate on their origins?"
But to be serious, I have emailed my Congress-critters and Senators a couple of times about different topics related to tech (minus the wife part!). I get varried responses from each person for each topic, so they seem to DO care about certain topics. It must vary from person to person, but I got a couple of hand signed letters for some things before, so don't despair that everything you send is totally disregarded.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Be sure not to follow the lead of earlier commenters and Cliff by referring to Congressman Taylor as Senator. I'm not to sure he would take you all too seriously. Also, his conservative voting record would be a reflection of the conservative district which he serves in Mississippi (Who thought Wallace would make a good president). Which just goes to show the Congressman Taylor votes on the mandate of the people, and doesn't always follow his own agenda.
1. What is the US doing about the terrible state of computer security (one to get him happy and talking)
2. What is the US government planning to do about the consequences this terrible security and lack of privacy laws is having on identify theft and the risk of terrorists using stolen identity (technique 2 - link two things in one question and make it hard for them to give answers heading in a direction away from you)
3 - The DMCA is supressing important research into security technologies, given the lack of security how do you justify this (get him on what he has admitted then force answers)
4 - What plans does the US government have for laws to prevent abuse of end user license agreements, digital rights management and other new technologies (note - you dont ask if there is a problem you state it and ask what they will do. a) this lets you make a point to him about what you see as important b) puts him in a position where he has to justify the position and explain it - the more you can keep them talking on such questions the better 8)
5 - Software patents, meritless lawsuits, high taxes and complex restrictions on exports are making it ever harder for business to justify remaining in the USA and not moving elsewhere. What are you doing to simplify it (same theory as above, and the word 'tax' requires an answer 8))
6 - Copying a protected ebook, even to help a blind user read it now carries a typical sentence higher than that of assault and many other acts of violence against the person. In these times of rising violent crime isn't it about time the US government got back to the needs of the people not the needs of large corporations.
These slimy balls of filth only care about their retirement.
"Congressman, I'm sure I speak for many people in the district in appreciating your efforts on [warm-fuzzy bill he sponsored]. As you may know, S.2048, the Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, would severely encroach on every person's right to lawful everyday use of industry-standard computers. It's being pushed by the entertainment conglomerates to eliminate digital devices that they don't approve of, even when those devices, such as computers and DVD players, are used to play amateur, independent, or public domain media. To protect the market share of these companies, S.2048 would make it a felony to make or sell... well, just regular computers like we have today.
"What is your position on S.2048? For or against?"
It's very important to stop talking now, as what I wrote is already a little long. Make sure you end your speech/question with this direct yes-or-no-type question.
Also it wouldn't hurt to schmooze the Congressman's staff people before or after the meeting. Just say hi, give them your card, and mention that you're against S.2048.
Your effect might be limited, however; as its name implies, S.2048 is a Senate bill and hasn't yet emerged from Judiciary Committee. There's a decent possibility it will not get to the House in its present form during this term.
Good luck.
How do you calculate the impact of the bills on the global economy?
How come you didnt anticipate that, for exemple, the DMCA could be used to shut down legitimate project that greatly benefit the population? (see for exemple the DMCA used by Sony to shut down the tinkering done to the AIBO, even though Sony realised that tinkering with their Aibo was a good thing and are now pushing it forward).
On issues of privacy, copyright, fair use, etc., liberal vs. conservative is not a very useful way to look at things. Worry instead about libertarian vs. authoritarian.
There are quite a few in both the liberal and conservative camps who would happily bargain away your freedom for a Hollywood fundraiser or a chance to demogogue about porn or 9/11. And there are quite a few in both camps who have a libertarian bent and are tend to defend freedom.
Did anyone else pick up that he is a Congressman and not a Senator?
Though the EFF and the ACLU have *somewhat* one-sided perspectives on such legislation, they're still a great resource. The papers that the EFF produces are always highly detailed and informative in nature. Maybe just stating some choice stats or using the information as background could help you get your point across.
--
"Everybody wants a rock to wind a piece of string around." - They Might Be Giants, "We Want a Rock"
You don't seriously expect an _honest_ answer do you. Of course you are going to end up with some sugar-coated pablum that will make a great sound byte on the local radio station.
the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head
Here's a nice page that details Rep. Taylor:
t ml ?func=front&ID=H2152103&dtype=B&state=ZZ
http://www.vote-smart.org/vote-smart/profile.ph
If you click on the "Voting Records" link, it takes you to a slew of major votes by your rep. Select the appropriate issues that matters to you and find out how he voted!
The Internet section is a bit slim, so you might have to try other places for voting records on smaller, specific items.
If you want more information about his voting record, just take a look at Opensecrets.org. I seem to notice a high correlation between campaign donations, the people who give them, the issues they support, and the way Senators/Representatives vote. Buying votes - it's called democracy.
:-)
As for questions to ask, I worked for a Senator for a while (I was an intern - nothing exciting). Anyway, it was my job to help set up these town meetings and I'll tell you one thing, Senators are very busy people. They only know what their aides have told them. Not because they aren't intelligent enough to understand the issues (most are very astute), they just don't have time to study every issue. I suggest asking very general questions like:
"Senator Hollings recently introduced a bill that will require every piece of electronic hardware to possess copyright protection. It has been argued by hardware manufacturers and consumer advocates that this will increase the costs of production as well as infringe on consumer's rights; what do you think of this bill?"
In essence, give him some background and try to get him to commit to something. Most good politicians will be able to easily sidestep the issues; however, if the question is clear enough, even the dullest watcher will be able to tell that he's trying to evade the question. Now, if you know his position on a topic, and you don't agree with it - go for the throat, but nicely. Try to get him to commit to an answer. Politicians hate committing to anything - and they hate their voting records to be scrutinized.
Hope this helps and I hope you agree with me on most issues. I hate helping the enemy.
/. once again proves it's incompetence as a 'news' site. With such a consistently low political savvy quotient, it's amazing this place isn't laughed off the internet.
I noticed your rep is on the armed services committee. If you're so inclined, ask him to give his opinion on free software, security, and M$'s push to get open source out of the military. Ask him how M$'s apparent problems with security would 'help' keep America safe.
Next time you post a joke you should try a funny one, like:
Two Nuns walked into a bar. "Ouch".
Sir, isn't it true that in the past new technologies and innovations have driven new industry and business, eg. moving to electric lights from oil lamps? And was this only possible with no interference, or at least no government funded interference, from industries that made money off the previous models(i.e lamp oil makers)?
If we want to continue to move forward with technology and improve on existing technologies shouldn't it be the industries(RIAA, Hollywood) that have to adapt, sink or swim and not the technology? Or for that matter, should it not be the consumer that drives the market, by choosing those emerging technologies they prefer?
How can we advance, if invested interests constantly interfere or control that advancement?
Might be a bit long, but maybe you can grab some ideas from this? Let's hear how it goes. G'luck
My congresswoman (Davis, R, VA) came to my school. She was a fucking clod. She had no clue what I was talking about -- thought that it was about Napster. She wouldn't answer anyone else's questions, just rehashed them and called them answers. So, I stood up and shouted at her "you suck, I'm never gunna vote for you!" The only reason she got elected was because the NRA put so much money into her -- and then only 'cause the other guy was a constitution-hating gun-nabber.
I think the hardest part about this battle is that they are so uninformed. They sit in their little committees and have no clue what goes on out side of that. They just vote based on the reccomendation of the committee -- and even then along party lines, in most cases.
What are your views on how to stop scourge of sharpies and other ink based copy protection defeating devices on the music industries profits?
(I posted this idea a day or so ago in another thread, but I think this could be a good thing to start asking congresspeople about.)
:-), half the money raised from the intellectual
Why don't copyright holders pay an annual tax of 1% on an assesment of the value of keeping their copyrights out of the public domain, like real estate holders do? If they stop paying annual intellectual property taxes, the copyright could revert to the public domain, like real estate reverts to the state when real property taxes are not paid. This would be a great way to increase federal and state tax revenues, while also promoting the public domain.
Essentially, since the "for limited times" bargain has been broken by copyright holders lobbying for extensions, shouldn't the bargain be re-balanced by now taxing all copyright holders for keeping their works out of the public domain? Why are copyright holders so fast to claim they hold so called "intellectual property" and yet they so far seem to remain exempt from any sort of annual "property tax" for the upkeep of the information superhighway that makes their so-called property so valuable, and the public domain of ideas which they draw from to create copyrighted works?
==== more background ====
If the Supreme Court rules against Eldred etc. and allows indefinite
copyright extensions (or even if they don't), here is an amusing idea. I
think I saw the germ of it first in another user's comment on Slashdot
months ago -- and now that I poke around the web and usenet I see that
many others have discussed it a tiny bit. In such a worst case where
copyrights are indefinite, perhaps a property tax on copyright owners
might be enacted as a last resort, where rights holders get to choose an
assessed value for having the monopoly of all rights to the work, and
rights holders pay some percentage (1%?) per year of that assessment,
with the restriction then rights holders have to release the work to the
public domain if a payment to them is made for the assessed amount.
Possibly the assessment would be broken down into rights categories, so
that there could be payments for freeing specific subrights -- like
non-commercial use. This category approach would allow a work to be
bought into the public domain in stages.
For example, if the Theodore Sturgeon Literary Trust puts, say, a
million dollar valuation on the "Skills of Xanadu" story (ironically
about freedom) relative to releasing it into the public domain (say, so
they could pursue movie rights for it), at an "intellectual monopoly"
tax rate of 1%, the trust would have to pay $10000 per year to keep the
monopoly. But if the Trust puts only a $1000 value on "The Skills of
Xanadu" to avoid significant taxes (only $10 a year then), I'd take out
my checkbook, maybe along with some other fans, and it would be free
today.
Note this assessed amount is for release into the public domain, not
necessarily the amount to be paid by someone else who wants the monopoly
transferred to them, which might be higher or lower, just like what real
estate sells for isn't necessarily the assessed rate. Since it it hard
to assess the value of a copyright, let the rights holder do it, as long
as this public domain buyout clause was in place to prevent overly low
self assessment of monopoly value.
If some people call patents and copyrights "intellectual property" (yes,
I know that term begs the question of how to handle them) then why not
laugh at them and just tax ownership of such "property"? After all, just
like real estate owners pay taxes to offset the heavy continual burden
their property puts on society (a need for police, fire departments,
water, roads, sanitation, planning boards, zoning, local schools, etc.),
there is a heavy continual burden on society for enforcing copyright
(prisons for infringers, costs of salaries for judges in court cases,
the time cost to individuals of making fair use determinations,
government subsidized distribution channels like the internet, the need
for the government to maintain accurate records, lawmaker's time, etc.)
which ideally should be born by copyright holders as opposed to the
general public.
Yes, I know such a tax might wreck havoc with the GPL or other freely
licensed software too. Most GPL copyright holders would probably need to
set their copyright assessment prices low and risk public domain
buyouts. And there are issues with previously selling off exclusive
rights separately to a work (although such rights holders could pay part
of the tax.) And there are issues with incrementally developed works, or
works with multiple copyright holders...
Still, the big issue is that the cost to society of the copyright
monopoly on any work is potentially high, and the person who should be
paying that social cost is really the rights holder, rather than passing
on external costs to others, as a form of social pollution. Some would
argue rights holders already paid a copyright tax when they registered.
Yet, people who get real estate pay a title transfer fee (sort of like a
copyright registration or renewal fee) but they still pay property taxes
afterwards too. If there was no records of taxes paid on a copyright,
it could be presumed public domain, or the copyright owner could be
pursued for tax evasion (until they disclaimed it to the public domain,
of course). This would make the state of copyright much clearer than the
current situation where it is very expensive to determine if a work is
under copyright, and if so, who currently owns it and how to contact
them. With real estate, all this is a matter of public record.
When registering to pay "intellectual property" taxes for their
monopolies, copyright holders might be required to deposit a complete
copy of the content and preferred form source in digital format in
escrow. This escrow would be in part to allow people wanting to use
public domain materials to easily search published content against
registered works. Escrow would also be in part to ensure the work would
be available unencrypted and unprotected when it became public domain,
such as if the rights holder stopped paying property taxes on it.
Perhaps the way to win the copyright battle, if all else fails, is to
give copyright holders what the want, then something else too that
naturally goes with it. Microsoft would have to put a price on releasing
the Windows source code to the public domain for example (including all
previous versions, which might have separate prices), and then they
would finally be forced to pay taxes. Yes, perennially people have
resisted taxes on capital, so it's an uphill battle, but it is another
front of the copyright battle to consider.
Obviously, stocks and bank accounts aren't often taxed by the federal
government while held (though some states do like with Florida's
"Intangible Personal Property Tax"),
http://www.myflorida.com/dor/taxes/ippt.html
so the argument would have to be worked through if the taxation was at
the federal level. And of course this makes the government meddle more
in everyone's affairs (at least, those claiming copyrights or software
patents) but maybe that's OK considering the alternative in this case
and how much they meddle already.
And, while I'm dreaming
monopoly tax could be used to fund more free software and free content
(and the other half would go to pay down the Federal deficit).
Note: even with laws like the above, I would support some form of
author's moral rights regarding their works, enforced separately from
copyright.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Mr Congressman: In the interest of equal justice under the law, would you: 1. Allow a designated expert to search your computers (work and home) for evidence of illegally obtained or pirated materials? 2. Give a plain-language translation of the EULA from any Microsoft, Oracle, Adobe or similar software publisher. 3. Answer a multiple-choice "what if" questionnaire concerning fair use scenarios. 4. Indicate whether you do or do not support DCMA etc. 5. If in favor of DCMA et. al., could you let us know what kind of pressure Jack Valenti, Hillary Rosen etc. have brought against you? (we know it won't show up in campaign finance disclosures) Is it under the table cash, or do they have pictures of you with underage girls, young boys or farm animals?
I think this likely means the senator is not the most technically savvy senator (not that any of them are) and he may not even be aware of a lot of the current IP issues. You might want to try asking the senator a simpler question(s) to show him that his constituents are concerned about IP issues. If you ask him a difficult question he (and the rest of the audience) won't understand it and he'll just side step it.
What process do you have in place to ensure that you are properly informed of the technological issues surrounding congressional bills? What initiatives are you taking to better streamline the feedback process in this increasingly digital age?
I notice your presence on the web is rather lacking. Is this due to lack of funds, lack of interest, or some other problem, and is anything being done to address this issue?
Given that "digital piracy" (etc. etc.) is already illegal under existing pre-digital-age copyright laws, is it really necessary to pass waves of new anti-technology legislation that seriously threaten the digital infrastructure that took 40 years to build?
From THOMAS: Gene Taylor has sponsored or co-sponsored two bills in the 107th Congress. Here they are.
Looking at this, I'd push the impairing-defense-readiness angle. CBPDTA (?), by preventing DoD from procuring GNU/Linux systems offering greater transparency and security and a lower total cost of ownership, does not contribute to the goal of a leaner, more efficient military and leaves the services more exposed to 21st Century asymmetrical warfighting tactics (e.g., the enemy-du-jour 0wning the properly-licensed regimental IIS server).
-- "Why, Mr. Anderson, why? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep voting? Do you think you're voting for something?"
He voted for the Communications Decency Act. Ask him how tighter controls on distribution and copying of porn can help fatten the bottom line of the commercial pornography industry.
___
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I went to a lecture given by my local congresswoman, under the impression that there would be a forum at the end for our questions to be answered.
Sure enough, none of my technology-related questions were answered, nor brought up.
Be prepared for a slew of terrorism-related and patriotism-invoking questions, though.
PayPal $$ if you sign up for free offers (eBay, cred cards, e
Alan, did you meet your wife on the short bus?
Alan, how can you fuck such a disgusting creature?
Alan, is the reason you code so much is so you don't have to look at Telsa's face?
What it actually said:
would you like tongue to ask Senator Taylor?
What I read:
would you like to tongue Senator Taylor?
What I thought:
ummm... not really
SONY. Because caucasians are just too damn tall.
he is a a Democrat. This is the same party-before-country group that called Clinton a hero of the Constitution. if they had any integrity whatsoever they would have left that sham of a party and formed another group that could be trusted. Partisan politics above rule of law and furthering the system of Rank hath all priveledges and no responsibility are all that they care about.
I haven't had much luck finding a good site that summarizes a bill-by-bill voting record along with a synopsis of the bill
That would make for an interesting website... A list of all Reps and the way they voted, and just for good measure a list of which corporations they recieved campaign contributions for. If people started seeing exactly how their elected member was voting it may change a few people's minds about how they decide to vote next election.
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp ?CID=N00003350&cycle=2002
a sp ?CID=N00003350&cycle=2002
0 22 6&mode=nested&tid=109
...and this:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.
Since he's a member of armed services committee, I'd ask him about Microsoft lobbying the pentagon for "higher taxes" i guess. ; )
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/23/032
I'd actually ask if
1) he has any ideas on how Armed Services (pentagon?) can save $gazillion$ due to increased use of open source software and..
2) if he knows that Microsoft is lobbying to prevent this.
3) if he doesn't know that you would be happy to send a member of his staff some information.
He'll likely say 'I haven't been briefed on this' and think 'what the hell is he talking about?' but the seed will be planted......
Cheers,
-b
Given an example of a real-life action that is illegal under the DMCA or SSSCA and ask whether it should be illegal. Then ask him if he's aware of the offending Act's prohibition. For example:
"If I buy a music CD, should I be allowed to copy it to tape so that I can play it in my car stereo? Or, If I buy an expensive game for my computer, should I be allowed to make a personal copy for every day use to prevent wearing out the original?"
When he agrees that you should be able, point this out:
"Both these examples are considered 'fair use' under case law but are being made illegal under the SSSCA. Hardware manufacturers will be forced to make copying for any purpose impossible without expressed permission."
If he doesn't agree, ask him to explain his reasoning.
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
Gene Taylor is a member of the US House of Representatives. Mississippi's Senators are Thad Cochran and Trent Lott, both Republicans.
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
Mr. Senator, why are the rights of the corporations (who aren't really people, btw...) being considered before the rights of the voting public? The DMCA and the CBPTBPABPA (I hate that damn acronym!) were designed to take our rights away to protect the 'oh so valuable corporate property', but no legislation was placed to protect our individual rights.
Right now, it feels like the laws are specifically being passed so that we, the consumers (and tax payers) are legally inclined to pay the MPAA and the RIAA money for absurd reasons. For example, if a DVD I bought gets scratched, I am forced to buy a new one or not watch the movie, all thanks to the DMCA. There isn't a provision that declares that I, as an individual, have the right to take necessary steps to back up the products I invested in. Instead, the big corps were given the right to lock up their precious content and force me to pay again for content I already paid once for.
Why isn't the government looking to preserve our individual rights before passing laws to help out corporations? Please tell me it's not because we're not paying the gov't enough money. 30% of my yearly income goes straight to the federal government.
"Derp de derp."
Check out Project Vote Smart, a non-partisan group which has the voting records on key votes and position information on a large (LARGE) number of candidates. It's definitely not complete on some of the internet issues, but it may be a good starting point.
Whatever you do... don't read this.
Does the .Net service break EU laws? .Net Passport service, which is designed to act as a single point of authentication for users when browsing the net. According to a statement from the Commission, an investigation will look at whether the service is compatible with EU data protection laws. The investigation could reveal flaws with any attempt to establish online authentication systems, said Simon Davies, head of watchdog group, Privacy International. Legal implications. Simon Davies, Privacy International "It is a tremendous opportunity to test the rigour of EU law and whether any technical standard for a global identity system can be established easily under European privacy laws," he said. "There are profound legal implications about the flow of information across the world and the privacy stakes are too high to allow Microsoft to control the standard," he added. US privacy groups have hounded Microsoft since the launch of .Net Passport in 1999. Last year an affiliation of US privacy groups asked the Federal Trade Commission to block the launch of Windows XP because of its tie-in with Microsoft's suite of .Net products. Microsoft is already involved in an EC investigation for allegedly designing its Windows operating system to work better with its own server software than those of its rivals. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_2 010000/2010839.stm
Privacy groups have welcomed the European Commission's decision to investigate whether Microsoft's system of collecting personal information from internet users breaks privacy laws. Dutch MEP Erik Meijer has raised questions about the software giant's
1) Earnings Management: The first and most important tool Microsoft uses is the manipulation of earnings to ensure analysts' expectations are met. According to an ABC News 1/22/99 article by Michael Martinez, Microsoft's own internal auditor, a respected 30 year veteran and former partner of Deloitte and Touche, was fired in 1996 after informing management that their earnings manipulations were illegal and violations of the SEC and FASB laws. He was given the option to resign or be fired and later settled for $4 million after suing under the Federal Whistle Blowers Act. 2) Speculating on Their Own Stock: Microsoft issues a massive amount of put options. During the same quarter ended 3/31/99, Microsoft sold put contracts on their own stock for $400 million, basically betting that the stock will not decline. They need not worry because they are allowed to "cook the books." Of Microsoft's significant cash balance, it is also a financial fact that more than 65 percent of that cash did not originate from product sales but rather from tax benefits associated with the exercise of stock options, employees prepaying their own wages, and the sale of put contracts on its own stock. Microsoft's financial innovation is making a mockery of financial integrity, ethics, and the securities laws, just as Insull did in the 1920's. 3) Convincing Employees to Take Less Real Wages: Microsoft aggressively markets stock options to new employees in an effort to take wage expenses off the books. They also know that they can pocket the exercise price employees will be required to pay to take ownership of the stock. What also seems clear is that Microsoft is still aggressively marketing its stock option program to new recruits. To quote an email received, "I am about to begin employment at Microsoft and the stock option was the selling factor. Does your article overall state that it will be bad for me and will fail me in my retirement planning?" Is Microsoft fulfilling its disclosure obligations to its own employees, especially those that have put their entire 401K balance in Microsoft stock? This explains how 22 percent of Microsoft's massive cash balance has actually come from its own employees in the form of them prepaying their own wages through stock option exercise prices. 4) Publicly touting the stock: In a recent earnings release, CFO Greg Maffei jokingly cited 10 reasons why Microsoft is a $1 trillion company. A common strategy here is to have top executives issue conflicting statements, one talking up the stock and the other talking it down and then within a few days financial analysts all come out with buy recommendations on the stock due to a small decline. They are making a mockery of financial integrity, ethics, and the securities laws. 5) Controlling the media. After issuing several press releases on PR Newswire, Microsoft told the service to stop issuing my press releases. Microsoft is PR Newswire's largest client. PR Newswire is owned by Miller Freeman of the UK, a large media company that publishes many computer related publications including Information Week in addition to Microsoft focused journals such as the Windows System Developer. Miller Freeman does indeed function as if it were a department of Microsoft itself. 6) Stock Option Accounting: It is important to note that any discussion of stock option accounting must address two completely different and independent situations. The first is to analyze the impact of options exercised and already retired and the second is to analyze the remaining options debt outstanding. This study focused on both whereas most media coverage only focuses on the remaining options debt outstanding. Options Exercised and Retired: When stock options are exercised, the options are retired as the employee takes ownership of the stock. The value of these "retired" options should not be a subject of debate. Upon exercise, the options are valued at the market price of the stock less the exercise price and the employee pays W-2 taxes on this gain, even if the stock is not sold. The company then takes a tax deduction for wage expense for the same amount. What is surprising is that not a dime of this expense is charged to earnings at Microsoft, which they could voluntarily do. This amount alone for 1999 should exceed $9 billion even though net income is only $7.8 billion. Remaining Options Debt Outstanding: The remaining unexercised stock option liability is a completely separate issue and a debt just as real as the current stock quote, especially if half of the options are currently vested and exercisable. We all know that stocks can be over and under valued yet the market gives us a price on any given day and that is the price. The Black Scholes and related footnote disclosure is a great mathematical model yet has become nothing but a Trojan Horse for plundering the retirement system. What the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve might concern itself with is that this debt, $60 billion at Microsoft, has no interest cost that hits the income statement and increases $800 million with each $1 increase in the stock price. Simply put, Microsoft is somewhat immune to Federal Reserve interest rate hikes, which explains why the stock is increasing as the Fed raises rates and continues creating a Long Term Capital like debt pyramid. 7) Purchasing future sales via equity investments: Another earnings management tool being used by Microsoft is the purchase of future sales via equity investments in other companies. Here is my understanding of how that works. I could be wrong on this and therefore the best thing to do would be confirm these claims with their CFO, Greg Maffei. First of all, Microsoft makes a $250 million investment in WebMD for an 11 percent equity stake and part of the deal is that WebMD commits to $100 million of advertising on MSN network. At the same time, Microsoft agrees to subsidize an equal amount in medical prescriptions for people using WebMD. Of course there are a few other interesting aspects of this transaction which won't be addresed in this report. You have basically bartered a purely paper transaction and current accounting rules will allow you to recognize the entire $100 million as revenues for MSN network, even though you are just "trading checks." That is, you are trading subscription subsidies for advertising revenues. Advertising revenues are indeed the political currency of the 1990's. Keating spent his dollars buying influence in Washington, D.C. Microsoft is buying influence on Madison Avenue. 8) Managing the financial analyst community. Another excellent earnings management technique is the management of the analyst community. This can be done by directing investment banking business associated with acquisitions to a variety of firms based upon their opinion of the stock. Microsoft purchased more than 33 companies in 1998. A good example here might be Rick Sherlund of Goldman Sachs, often noted as the guy who can move tech stocks. One might ask why Mr. Sherlund refers to Microsoft as a company with no debt when they clearly have a contractual obligation, just as real as today's stock price, of $60 billion to their employees. Fidelity Investments, one of Microsoft's largest shareholders and also provider of their 401K retirement plan, has been silent on this issue. 9) Trying to Discredit Those Seeking to Expose the Scheme: Microsoft fired its internal auditor, regularly bullies reporters and has told numerous publications that I am an extremist. This might explain why reporters are afraid to print the facts, for instance that Microsoft took a $9 billion tax deduction for wages in 1999 and didn't charge a dime of this amount against earnings. 10) Money Laundering: Microsoft has been aggressively investing cash pilfered from the retirement system in a variety of new businesses, many outside the U.S., including cable investments in Brazil and England. We read about the Russian government robbing its citizens of $10 billion in IMF loans. What about the impact of the retirement system being pilfered and being set up for a Savings and Loan like debacle? 11) Corruption of Higher Education: Microsoft is making massive cash infusions to leading Universities and impairing the system's independence. In the last year alone Microsoft has given MIT more than $50 million in grants, focusing on key growth areas including storage services and software to provide course instruction over the Internet. In the past we were able to rely on these Universities to stimulate key debates yet now they are silent on this pyramid issue. Two Universities that should be ashamed of themselves for not only not disclosing this situation yet also fostering its development are Harvard and Stanford. They are contributing greatly to the complete corruption of our financial markets. 12) Manipulating Investors Who Use a Passive Approach Relying on Indexes Such as the S&P 500. In an effort to reduce investment fees and provide solid diversification, investment based upon mirroring the S&P 500 has become the most significant component of large public pension plans. Since Microsoft represents more than 4 percent of the S&P 500, Microsoft knows that four cents of every dollar going to stock purchases will go toward the purchase of Microsoft stock. Again, this situation has developed because Microsoft has inflated its earnings to such an extent that it looks much more profitable than it really is, fueling interest in the stock and resulting in a market value of close to half a trillion dollars. It is admirable to stick to an investment strategy using passive indexes based upon the S&P 500, yet this is not about investment strategy but rather fraud management. For this reason a letter was sent to the top 100 teachers unions in the country, encouraging them to effect a policy change designed to combat this fraud and have Microsoft removed from their portfolios. California State Controller Kathleen Connell, who sits on the board of the California Teachers Pension, has also been sent a summary of findings in the hope that she will help address this issue. Another good question might be, why haven't the State Teachers fund advisors initiated this effort on their own, that is, to modify the index in order to protect participants and meet their fiduciary responsibility? Is it not also ironic that Judge Penfield Jackson is trying to determine whether or not Microsoft has monopoly power and meanwhile his pension is most likely being plundered by Microsoft in the most significant financial fraud this century? Federal Pensions rely heavily on an S&P 500 index fund. In October the Dow Jones Corporation decided to add Microsoft to the Dow Index. On a market cap basis, Microsoft will now account for more than 15 percent of the entire index given that its market capitalization and stock option debt exceed $540 billion. Microsoft now also has 5.2 billion shares outstanding, not including an additional 800 million shares committed and outstanding to employees for stock options. This means that a $1 change in the stock price creates a change in their market cap of $6 billion. Gross annual sales are only $20 billion, an amount on which significant losses occurred. Sadly, the Dow Jones Corporation, parent to Barons and the Wall Street Journal, has also unknowingly become a key contributor to this massive financial fraud at Microsoft. In the last 6 months the Dow Jones Corporation, which earns licensing fees from these indexes, has initiated two new indexes which will allow Microsoft to accelerate its plundering of the retirement system. These are the Global Titan Index and secondly the revised Dow Index. Both could result in significant new demand for Microsoft stock and leave investors holding inflated paper just as Savings and Loan investors were left holding junk bonds. Given that Microsoft may be the largest advertiser to the Wall Street Journal, perhaps they should make an outright offer to purchase the Dow Jones Corporation. This would provide more clarity regarding constituencies and the Wall Street Journal could be added to the MSN lineup. Rather than disclose this situation, the Wall Street Journal has instead focused on trivial items regarding Microsoft's financial practices, most recently how deferred revenue is recognized. It is astonishing that the Wall Street Journal refuses to report this story. Several Impacts from Microsoft's Financial Pyramid Scheme Include the Following: 1) Government Will Be Defunded. Beginning next year, education, defense and other key programs will have to fight over a sudden and sharp drop in tax receipts. Corporate tax receipts are already down 6 percent while individual receipts are up 6 percent. Since these bogus deductions are able to be carried over and offset against future quarters' earnings, this difference will accelerate in the future and leave various government agencies fighting for a smaller pool of resources. This was forecast in the study. Also to consider are massive AMT tax credits that individuals who paid tax upon exercising options will be carrying forward into next year and offsetting ordinary income tax. Analyzing this situation should be a top priority for both the Federal Reserve and Treasury given the upcoming budget negotiations. There is a unique irony that Bill Gates recently dedicated $1.5 billion to minority student scholarships and at the same time is leading a massive fraud that will effectively defund public education in many states. 2) The Retirement System Is Being Plundered. Most new investment in Microsoft is coming from the 401K, 403B and public pension participants through large funds such as Fidelity, State Street, Barclays and Janus. These fund families will make their fees whether the stock goes up or down and they are clearly not meeting their fiduciary responsibility to plan participants. Their consultants and advisors including Buck, Callan and William Mercer might do a risk assessment based upon the 404C fiduciary requirements. The Savings and Loan debacle took down not only many banks but also their consultants, accountants and law firms. 3) Business Owners Are Exposing Their Personal Assets By Not Paying Enough Attention To Their 401K. ERISA 404C has severe sanctions against employers who are not adequate stewards of their 401K plans, specifically those that do not meet the prudent fiduciary expectation. Such lawsuits are already beginning, the corporate veil is no protection and the law also allows for treble damages. Most CFO's put 401K plans on their "to do" list, check them off once set up and move on to the next thing. Many seem not to grasp that these are, for the most part, non-company assets. 4) The Dollar Is Being Devalued In Relation to the Yen. The Japanese have struggled for 10 years to recover from their own version of accounting fraud and they know that now is not the time to accommodate our monetary desires without first forcing us to face up to the corruption in our own markets. Simply put, Japan is becoming our own personal IMF and will devalue our currency until reforms are initiated. As noted before, what caused the Japanese banking crisis was not plunging real estate values nor bad monetary policy, but rather accounting fraud in which companies put phony assets on the books, in particular software research and development costs. These costs should have been charged to earnings. Loans were made off these bogus assets which helped bank stock values increase, leading to margin lending by consumers to buy the stock, often borrowing off real estate values to get the shares. When the loans could not be repaid and it was realized that there were no real assets backing them, the system collapsed. It was a startling public display of Alan Greenspan's need to brush up on accounting when he actually said in his Jackson Hole speech that corporate profits were understated due to not capitalizing software costs. Those of us familiar with this industry know software is subject to rapidly becoming obsolete with most products requiring constant upgrades to stay competitive. Due to this obvious need for the Federal Reserve to better understand key issues in determining share values, Parish & Company is recommending that the Federal Reserve Board be expanded by one non-voting member from the mutual fund industry. This recommendation includes nominating John Bogle, founder of the Vanguard family of mutual funds, to be considered for this role. 5) False Inflation is Emerging. This paper wealth, rooted in a bogus tax deduction that grossly overstates earnings, is driving Microsoft's stock price which in turn greatly expands the purchasing power for luxury goods and services. Most inflation is now in services and luxury goods and not reflected in the CPI. This is false inflation because it is a result of a scheme, not economic fundamentals. Given the capacity to increase supply due to more efficient production and heightened global competition, it is tough to raise prices. Only monopolies are indeed able to even keep prices at current levels. We therefore have a reality of low inflation competing with a pyramid scheme creating an illusion of inflation. This is not good for any of us, especially the investment industry. 6) The Integrity Of The Markets Is Being Destroyed. This is perhaps the greatest risk and again what led to the Great Depression in the 1930's. It is a fact that Roosevelt wanted to nationalize the accounting profession and make all auditors government employees due to a complete loss of confidence in the accounting profession. 7) The Fraud Is Accelerating. Microsoft reported earnings of $2.2 billion for the quarter ending 9/30/99 although they actually incurred a significant net loss. Company press releases imply that they took a tax deduction for stock option wages of between $2.5-4 billion and none of this amount was charged to earnings. Many investors believe that option wages are charged to earnings when the options are exercised, yet that is false. Employees pay ordinary income tax when the options are exercised, even if the stock is not sold, and the company does take a tax deduction, yet this amount is not charged to earnings. As previously discussed, stock option wages are indirectly considered in the earnings per share calculation due to more shares being outstanding but they are never charged to earnings. These are two completely separate things, that is, charges to earnings and the number of shares outstanding used to calculate earnings per share. In basic fractions we call this the difference between a numerator and denominator. 8) Microsoft auditor, Deloitte and Touche, issued a "clean" audit opinion. This appears to be a clear violation of the SAS auditing standards given that there was no mention in the opinion of several significant items, including the massive contingent liability for stock options. Deloitte has sadly identified itself as a key enabler of this scheme, which is remarkable given that they also function as the auditor for many large pension plans. Fidelity investments is now in the process of gaining approval for Deloitte to audit more plans and does also manage Microsoft's 401K plan. 9) Parish & Company formally requested that the Federal Reserve expand its scope to include more focus on mutual funds and add John Bogle, retired founder of the Vanguard family of funds, as a non-voting member. Mutual funds are to the Federal Reserve what the Internet has been to communications and it is time the Federal Reserve respond. Fidelity Investments alone is now managing more than $600 billion that is completely outside the traditional banking system. This is particularly important given the speed of change in the financial markets. The Federal Reserve needs to be more responsive to breakdowns in the overall system as clearly evidenced by this massive fraud and corruption occurring at Microsoft. Bogle was chosen for his deep knowledge of the mutual fund system and his integrity. A close review of the backgrounds of the federal reserve economists and staff clearly indicate the need for this type of outside influence. More than 75 percent of the Federal Reserve's technical staff appear to come from no more than five universities. 10) Significant one day stock value declines at major corporations that pay more in cash wages than stock options are accelerating. Examples in October include Hewlett Packard, Xerox and IBM. Even though Hewlett Packard is much more profitable than Microsoft, their stock will suffer unless they either join the fraud in an aggressive way or expose it. Let's hope they do the latter. Should we really reward such financial fraud at Microsoft by making its earnings look much better than others when it will result in significant job losses in companies that choose to pay real wages that are charged to earnings? Maintaining a strong stock value is key to competitiveness given the need to purchase outside technology with stock and forge key partnerships. If unable to keep up, these companies will lose market share and be forced to curtail benefits and ultimately lay off significant numbers of employees. These types of layoffs are now accelerating, further destabilizing the economy. Stock options are an excellent benefit yet like all benefits they have a real cost that should be charged to earnings to maintain the integrity of our free market system. 11) Microsoft organized a lobbying effort to defund the Department of Justice, using supposedly non-partisan groups like the Citizens for a Sound Economy. Imagine how difficult it would be for someone like myself, if a government employee, to discuss this situation. I would probably be transferred to a filing job at the North Pole. Strange, how similar to Jakarta we are becoming. Again, the issue is not about stock market valuation but rather corruption and financial fraud. An inside joke among many top Japanese businessmen is that the only place easier to buy influence than Jakarta is Washington, D.C. Now is the time to send a message of integrity and prove them wrong. 12) Conversions to cash balance pension plans are increasing. This is another pyramid impact. What IBM employees still don't seem to realize is that their lost pension benefits are resulting from fraud at Microsoft. Microsoft is pilfering these cash balance plans into its pyramid scheme by overstating its earnings, thereby drawing a larger percent of the index based investment on the S&P 500 and correspondingly making it more difficult for companies like IBM to compete. This forces these companies to cut back on real benefits in an effort to keep its earnings and stock price up. This was also clearly identified in the original study. The Department of Labor has begun reviewing the activities of actuaries with respect to these conversions. Is it not amazing that in many cases these same actuaries are advising public pensions whose assets are being plundered by this massive fraud at Microsoft. In the late 1980's pension raids were very popular and easy to implement. You basically hire an actuary to put forth a new set of assumptions indicating fewer assets are needed to meet pension obligations, and skim off the top. Cash balance plans are a sham and nothing more than a creative way to do what was outlawed in the 1980's. The Department of Labor should aggressively investigate this area. http://billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html
What questions might Cheek ask also?
This what you should say/ask: It seems that major cable companies in Australia are implementing limits on the amount of bandwidth a user can use per a month...in essence returning to the pay-per-minute internet subscription model. My question is will you sponsor, or even better, present a legislation that would stop such a thing from happening here in the United States since the industry lacks competition.
-----
One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
When I was an intern in a Congressman's office, I was able to attend a number of informal, off-the-record talks between senators, congressman, and interns (and only interns!)
At the end of the talk, we were allowed to ask questions on any topic, and I got to see first hand what questions work and what questions fail.
Your question needs to be pointed, but not too specific because believe it or not, a congressman votes on alot of bills everyday, and he doesn't have time to read all of them in depth, that's why he has a staff.
So a question like "line 2 paragraph 8 of the DMCA says this, but...." won't cut it, he won't know what the hell you're talking about. But if you are too broad, he will just ramble on about nothing for 2 minutes and then move on to another question.
The best thing for you to do is present one or two simple and well-documented problems/weaknesses with the DCMA, and then ask him how he thinks the problems could be solved.
And, damn, this is the most important of all...don't buy into the media's portrayal of all government officials being corrupt...give the man the benefit of the doubt and give him the respect he deserves
Thank you Dave Raggett
You would not really ask a question as stupid as the one you posted...would you?
Thank you Dave Raggett
Shouldn't that be Congressman Taylor (not senator).
Both of your senators voted for it. According to the roll call, 99 senators voted yea, 1 did not vote Sen. Gregg (R-NH). Sounds kinda fishy to me right from the start there. Following the House activity thereafter (btw, DMCA was an ammending of WIPO), we see absolutely NO (none, zilch, nada, anti-democracy) vote recorded in the House roll calls regarding DMCA. In fact, the roll call records NOTHING regarding the DMCA after the Senate vote in May, 1998.
However, following the paper work between the House and Senate Congressional Record articles from the 105th Congress we DO find that it went to conference committee, it was brought to the floor on October 12, 1998 (weeks prior to the impeachment hearings...hmmmmmm), and a vocal vote was taken to suspend the rules and agree with the conference report. Here are the recorded proceedings of our House:
" The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. COBLE) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the conference report on the bill, H.R. 2281 .
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the conference report was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. "
End of story. Case closed. Screw your reconsiderations. Hmmmm.
Doesn't sound like parliamentary process to me. Last I knew we had a red, white, and blue flag, but seemingly I was mistaken and it's red with a star and sickle or something like that.
No wonder the CARP recommendations were knocked down and certain Congressmen are petitioning letters out the door to counteract the DMCA, seeing that our Congressional representatives in the House didn't even have an official recorded vote on the subject.
Personally, I do not believe that DMCA was legally enacted into law, and perhaps you should pose some questions to the Congressman regarding the fact that DMCA was enacted without a final recorded vote from the 105th Congress. And bring up the fact of its blatant violation of "fair use" and consumer privacy. And again, remind him that the House did not record a final vote on DMCA and ask him if this kind of activity is what he considers democracy in action.
Just bribe him dammit! That's what he's here for!
Your ideas are intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
the nick is tongue... ...
he manages to meet senetors
why bother loosing time asking questions man, do what you do best!
Look, I don't live there and it's really none of my business...but...
Given the amount of times industry financing of congressmen's and senators' campaigns are mentioned I would suggest asking a pertinent question on campaign finance!
To this casual observer that seems to be at the root of a lot of the problems the hacker community are facing over there.
"Can you explain an area where you feel the government could conceivably help, but is limited by the Constitution?"
I asked my state rep. that question in front of a room full of people, and pretty much left him speachless. It was a beautiful thing.
The bulk of the modern disaster of IP laws comes from legislators either not understanding the subject matter, or being outright manipulated by the powers-that-be. Consider the plight of the modern programmer, whose profession is doomed by software patents.
One cannot regard software as free speech and support software patents - the two concepts are opposites. In the context of a politician, imagine having to pay at least $250 for a copyright research for every speech he made - and then having to spend six months to 'develop' a speech that doesn't use any constructions patented by either Micro$oft or IBM.
So where does the good Senator stand - are patents on software a good idea, or should programming be considered free speech ? And if the Senator backs the status quo, what is he going to do for all the out of work developers once they cannot get permission (or afford to buy the rights) to program from the powers-that-be ?
thank you.
I recommend going to www.vote-smart.org for information about politicians. It's run by a bunch of volunteers and they refuse all money from anyone except private individuals. The have voting records, statements made, and the opinions of all of the position groups for every politician and candidate.