Slashdot Mirror
Tech-Conscious Congressmen?
Political Geek asks: "Many times we have seen clueless U.S. Senators and Congressmen supporting technology related bills that hurt consumers and developers when they are passed (for example, the 1998 DMCA, and Senator Hollings SSSCA/CBDTPA) However, there may be some hope for a few of our elected leaders. I have been asked by a staff member of a US Congressman to submit a list of issues that are the most important to individuals active in the tech sector. Therefore, instead of screwing-up this opportunity by replying to this request on my own, I am passing this request on to the Slashdot community: What issues/problems are most important to you and what is necessary to resolve them?" I'm going to keep posting questions like this in the hopes that, when a reader can bend the ear of their representative, that these issues can be heard.
Too many H1B Visas. They need to be reduced or eliminated. The Asian Indiana workers are willing to work for half of what US citizens are making, therefore, drive down wages. They also fill spots that can be filled by unemployed American workers instead.
Politicians clamoring to regulate high tech and ruin it like other businesses got ruined. An example is the auto industry.
Solutions and ideas:
Keep high tech unregulated which encourages it to flourish. That means saying no to Senator Fritz "Disney" Hollings and the MPAA/RIAA. Also saying no to Jack "Fist Pounding" Valenti.
Tax incentives to companies that offer for flex time and telecommuting to their workers. Those are being taken away in the current tight job market.
Tax incentives to companies that buy high tech equipment and software such as more generous depreciation schedules. This would encourage them to stay updated.
Eliminate H1B Visas.
Repeal the DMCA especially the onerous provisions that stifle research.
Tax incentives to telecomm companies that put out high speed connections such as DSL to areas that don't have high internet speed service such as rural areas.
1. The "Trusted Computing" initiative. That has immense power to be abused, and will be largely in the hands of companies and organizations who are more interested in power and profits rather than privacy and security.
2. The Homeland Security Act (or whatever the official name is). This has gone past security into just plain scary. A national database of every monetary transaction that takes place in the US? Absolute freedom for wiretapping (of all flavors)? Our rights are swirling down the drain, and in this case, technology is making it a bit easier to do it. Let's see some legislation protecting the American citizen for a change.
3. Sort of related to 1. Media and software companies should NOT have the right to do ANYTHING to a person's computer, regardless of what EULAs you agree to. Legislation needs to be put into place regulating the access that any company has to an individual's computer. We have to stop allowing the entertainment industry to dictate legislation here.
4. Campaign finance reform - related to 1 and 3. We all know politicians are slithy toves who are as fickle as the wind. It is their nature. We need campaign finance reform to STOP large companies of all types being able to make large donations (cough cough Microsoft cough cough RIAA). I personally think political donations should ONLY be able to be made by individuals, and should be capped at a level that most people could afford.
Styrofoam IS biodegradable, you're just impatient!
1. Hiring practices in the IT industry (age discrimination, H1B, etc.) Here is a good place to read more.
2. Software licensing practices, UCITA etc.
3. Copyright and Patent issues, especially related to the corporate "land grab" mentality towards ideas and code. This has the most drastic long term effects, while the previous two are easier (I think) issues for Congress to address.
DMCA - Chilling free speech since 1998.
1) Finding it very difficult to watch encrypted DVDs on non-proprietary operating systems such as Linux due to laws such as the DMCA. Although there are projects that exist outside the US that let me do this (for example the excellent VLC project), many Linux distributions do not come readily set up to be able to play encrypted DVDs.
2) Attempts to apply laws such as the DMCA outside the US (such as the case of Dmitry Sklyarov).
3) Proposals to pass laws requiring computer equipment to include DRM (digital rights management) hardware, such as that used in Microsoft's Palladium project. This has severe implications for both freedom of information, privacy, and free/open source operating systems and software. If the US were to pass such a law the rest of the world would be very likely to end up using the same technology, even though no such law may exist elsewhere in the world.
Essentially, the main problems I see are about freedom -- the rights of the individual, to use their computer hardware and software in ways they want to, must be protected as a form of free speech.
Yes, copyright theft is illegal, but just because I can break the law doesn't mean I will break the law. By electronically limiting the things people can do, huge power could be handed over to large corporations who themselves have very poor legal records (such as Microsoft).
In my opinion, if freedom is taken away from computer users we will be limited to viewing BigCorporation's approved content. Technological innovation in the US will be stunted and the US will slip behind other countries with more liberal technology laws. This will affect not only the US economy, but those of other developed countries.
"The noble art of losing face will one day save the human race"---Hans Blix
The DOJ had an airtight case against Microsoft, and then they basically dropped it. Why? Well a change in the Oval Office certainly had something to do with it, but I firmly believe that there are ethical questions here that the American people deserve to have answered.
The DMCA was passed in the House of Representatives by a "voice vote", where no record of individual votes is available. The lack of accountability created by this practice is reason enough to discontinue it. If I get screwed, I at least want to know by whom.
Consumer Broadband and Digital Television don't need Protection. Furthermore, the two are completely unreleated and have no reason to be mentioned together in the same bill. The entertainment industry wants to kill the Internet as we know and replace it with a glorified cable TV system. The Internet is not cable TV. I for one prefer it to stay that way.
I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
Patent Craziness
... one wonders what was in the minds of the Congress".
Patents should protect "inventions", which have to be truly novel and non-obvious. The PTO has repeatedly been granting patents to things which do not deserve patent protection. An undeserved patent stifles innovation and creativity. Business process patents, software patents, and patents for computerizing otherwise ordinary activities are all stifling innovation.
Copyright
Congress is fundamentally off track. I can only echo Justice O'Connor from the Eldred oral argument: "If the overall purpose of the Copyright Clause is to encourage creative work,
- Copyright is way too long. The Constitution authorizes Congress to protect "authors", not their children and grandchildren. Repeal the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension.
- DMCA. It puts a locked safe around fair use, destroys first sale (which is NOT just the right to resell, but the beginning of full property rights for the purchaser), and creates a very nasty chilling affect for white-hat security research. When applied to software it violates the first amendment. Section 1201 is not a valid exercise of any enumerated Congressional power. Repeal the anti-circumvention provisions now.
- Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) This does not need legislative assistence. NO!
- Clickwrap/Shrinkwrap EULAs: these are not valid contracts, and any attempts to make them so using state law should be preempted by the Federal Copyright Act if the terms seek to unilaterily deny consumers the benefits of the Copyright Act, such as fair use, first sale rights, etc. In particular, reverse engineering clauses should NEVER be enforcable.
Privacy
- Pass comprehensive spam legislation immediately
- Stop companies from sharing data about me unless I explicitly "opt-in". This is especially important with phone records and financial records. This is a commerce power question, not a free speech question. Consumers have a right not to speak. The government can speak for it's citizens to say that they do not want to "opt in" by default. If they can "opt in" manually, there is no free speech issue. Outlaw pricing differently based on the choice.