Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology
Make sure to check out Declan McCullagh’s excellent overview of the Bush record on technology policy. (Hey, it has to be an excellent article if he quotes me in it!) No, seriously, this is the best assessment of the Bush’s (non-)record to date. (And here’s my old piece on why these two candidates offer us a distinction without a difference on tech & telecom policy.)
The WSJ had a good piece yesterday on how telco and cable companies have morphed into the same thing (you’ll need a subscription to see it). Here’s a graph:
In Omaha, Neb., cable giant Cox Communications Inc. has toppled the regional Bell and become the area’s largest phone company. Over in New York, Cablevision Systems Corp. has signed up 115,000 phone customers.
Meanwhile, in the Southwest, telecom titan SBC Communications Inc. has landed 120,000 subscribers for the satellite-TV service it launched in March with EchoStar Communications Corp. Verizon Communications Inc. has built a fiber-optic network in a Texas town and will use it to offer “cable” TV service this fall.
[…]
Last Friday George Mason University Law School held a symposium called “The Economics of Self-Help and Self-Defense in Cyberspace.” It was an excellent event with a cutting-edge topic – technological self-help – that deserves more study. Self-help dominates our entire legal system, as influenced by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Self-help arrangements, either contractual or self-defense – occur everday. Society permits, even encourages, self-help when the legal remedy is less available or less efficient. But what about a virtual “repo man“?
I immediately hit Richard Epstein with the direct question of whether digital media copyright holders should be able to engage in self-help by invading computers and searching for pirated media (as in the Berman bill, or more perniciously, when Sen. Hatch actually said that he favors using technology to remotely destroy the computers of those who illegally download music on the net.). He indicated that any regime of self-help, as opposed to legal help through the courts or law enforcement, must have net positive benefits to society.
Ray Gifford over at PFF brought this new FCC “Kids Zone” website to my attention.
It includes a goofy little mascot named “Broadband” (seriously, is that the best they could come up with?) who welcomes kids to the site and encourages them to learn about the exciting world of number portability and the Do Not Call list. (As Dave Barry might say, you can’t make this stuff up folks.)
Increasingly, its looking like documents reported by Dan Rather and CBS’s 60 Minutes last week regarding President Bush’s National Guard Service are fakes. It’s been a lesson in typography for most of us, but more and more experts seem to be publicly questioning the documents.
This is one case where my messy desk has proven helpful. I found–by total coincidence–a 1983 paper published here at Heritage, in courier font. That led me to recall the philosophy of the Heritage director of research at the time, who refused to use Times Roman because it looked too polished, rather than like a quick-turnaround briefing paper. Who after all coul print something in Times Roman quickly? Maybe the National Guard could in 1972, but I doubt it.
The real interesting thing about all this is CBS’s denial. Dan Rather in particular has come out swinging–saying to CNN: “I know that this story is true.” When asked about a retraction, the answer was: “Not even discussed, nor should it be.”
Pretty strong stuff.
Oracle! Chalk one up for Oracle in its battle against its former allies at the Antitrust Division. Yesterday, a federal court threw out DOJ’s (somewhat screwy) challenge to Oracle’s takeover bid for PeopleSoft. Using some market share ledgermain, DOJ maintained that the merged firm would dominate some specific, narrow, carefully defined, somewhat imaginary sub-sub-markets of the business software market. Never mind that it’s quite a crowded field, with major competitors such as SAP, countless minor players, a looming giant (Microsoft of course), and changing technology that would undermine any dominance anyway. Despite the win, the issue isn’t settled yet, as DOJ may still appeal, and an investigation is still ongoing in Europe (remember SAP?). Of course, if Oracle needs any advice on how to proceed, there probably are a few folks at Microsoft who can share their experiences.
Last week, I published a short article that used the birthday of the Internet as a hook for saying that 35 years may seem old, but the Internet is still young. Regulators need to remember that internet applications are still developing, and shouldn’t be treated as “mature” akin to a public utility (see VoIP, censorship, etc.). I received some feedback saying that September 2 was really the birthday for ARPANET, created by the United States Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) that in 1969 linked universities and research centers. So was I wrong about the birthday?
Good discussion-starter, Braden. Both these bills bring up some genuinely tough questions. Here’s what is clear (at least to me)…
One: the spyware problem–broadly defined to include all sorts of Internet pests, ranging from drive-by downloads of funky, unwanted toolbars to stealing your home phone number–is a serious one. People are frustrated. It is, for instance, the number one source of tech support calls to Dell. It’s also the source of quite a few calls to MacAfee, largely from my own household.
The spyware issue on the Hill is heating up. Today the Judiciary Committee held a full committee markup hearing on H.R. 4661, the “Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2004.” How does it differ from the H.R. 2929 “SPY ACT” (aka. the Bono bill)?
HR 4661 is in the Judiciary Committee, and carries with it criminal penalties enforceable by DOJ. The Commerce Committee bill HR 2929 imposes civil penalties as enforced by the FTC. The Judiciary bill contains only a few narrow prohibitions, while the Commerce bill has a long list of prohibitions relating to deceptive acts or practices and of collection of certain information (without notice and consent).
Which is the better bill? Do we really need spyware legislation? (this question asks not whether spyware is a problem, but whether legislation will do anything positive to reduce it).
The U.S. isn’t the only country struggling with decisions on how (or whether?) to regulate VOiP. Internet Daily reports today that OfCom, Britain’s telecom regulator, opened an inquiry on the subject Monday. It’s “initial views” are that the service needs a light touch. It argued against requiring standard service features, saying consumers should be able to make informed decisions for themselves about what they want. Perhaps surprisingly, it even argued against mandated “999” service (that’s British for “911”). Seems like good news from old Europe.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
