Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States

Ask Jamie Love, Consumer Technology Activist 212

Posted by Roblimo from the fighting-for-the-underdog dept.
Jamie Love is head of the Ralph Nader-founded Consumer Project on Technology [CPT], one of the first groups to advocate Linux use in government and corporate settings. CPT also works to loosen or remove patent restrictions that raise the end user cost of technologies ranging from computer software to AIDS medication, and against intellectual property laws and treaties that could hamper new technology development. Jamie is one of the most respected technology lobbyists in Washington, even though his entire annual budget probably wouldn't buy a month's worth of lunches for Microsoft's PR firm. What's it like in the lobbying trenches? What can you do to help? Jamie's the one to ask. One question per post, please. 10 of the highest-moderated ones will go to Jamie by email, and we'll run his answers as soon as he gets them back to us.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Jamie Love, Consumer Technology Activist More

Ask Jamie Love, Consumer Technology Activist

Comments Filter:

  • DMCA (Score:2, Informative)

    by FortKnox ( 169099 )
    I bet this'll be asked a million times.

    What's your take on the DMCA?
    How do we get the government to see the wrongs of it??

  • Politician's Reaction (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dexter1 ( 244765 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:08PM (#2256027)
    From my perspective, it seems that all of the politicians in congress seem to be firmly in the grasp of big business on intellectual property issues. The arrest of Dmity Sklyarov seems to have been at best ignored, at worst praised, by these politicians. Is my perspective a correct one, or are politicians actually aware of the issues and responsive to viewpoints other than those of big business? Are there any particular politicians that seem more receptive (that could potentially campaign and convince others)?

  • Consequences for Patent Breakers? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bonker ( 243350 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:09PM (#2256031)
    I beleive it was Brazil(? Please correct me) who recently ordered pharma plants to start manufacturing AIDS drugs in violation of U.S. patents. What are the consequences for countries who violate patents like this? Can we take this as a sign that violating a patent in this manner, 'for the public good' so to speak, is going to become more common and acceptable?

    • Yes, it's in Brazil. WTO also supported brazilian government decision. But the patent owner agreed to reduce drastacally the roalyites. Now it's cheapper to buy from patent owner then manufacture it ourselves.

      I'm sure this will save a lots of lifes around the world.

      • actually, this will ruin lives. Once you take away patent protection, you reduce the incentive to create new drugs. think about what threatening to take a patent is in reality.....theft. And when it is sanctioned by others, consider the message it sends to scientists, inventors, and businessmen. If you create something of value, and we don't agree with the level of profit you want in return, we will steal it from you and abrogate the entire notion of a free market. Brazil and Africa will soon feel the consequences of such barbarism.
        • Don't be so melodramatic.

          In reference to the AIDS plague, no one is talking about taking away all patient privileges for all pharmaceuticals. Reducing the privilages a bit in some very particular and well-defined situations won't bring the whole industry to a halt. The large number of people that will die fullfills the burden of proof on the side of reducing the privileges, your burden of proof is a detailed economic impact study of such a limited change in the system. Until you have that in hand, spreading FUD about the end of the industry is unjustified.

          For more of my take on this issue, see this [kuro5hin.org] post on k5.

          • Is no one talking about taking away all patent priviliges? What else is implied when a government threatens to take a patent away? When you appease a government of thugs you are opening the door for lots of problems.
            this [aynrand.org] site.

            Melodrama? How about realistic. Are you telling me that it's okay to bully a company as long as the whole industry doesn't come to a hault. Or if certain patents are upheld as long as a government agrees with the prices being charged is that justice? Remember, without these pharmaceutical companies, these people would have no hope whatsoever. You talk about reducing the "priviliges" of these companies to sell at a price that the market will pay. I didn't realize it was a privilege to create a product and offer it for sale to others. I suppose these patients have a "right" to the hard work of these companies. What about the right of these companies and their investors/owners?
            • It's not a privilege to create and sell a product. It is a privilege to be granted an artificial monopoly on said product because you invented it.
              Patents and IP in general are not god-given rights (or any other sort of rights). They are privileges, created by governments to further the public good by encouraging innovation. When patents are used to restrict the public good (ie keeping medicine from dying people in Africa), they should be thrown out the window.
          • In reference to the AIDS plague, no one is talking about taking away all patient privileges for all pharmaceuticals...large number of people that will die fullfills the burden of proof on the side of reducing the privileges

            Why stop at AIDS? A "large number of people" are going to die from heart disease, cancer, and infectious diseases in "poor" countries (BTW, there are really "poor" African countries, Brazil is Latin America's leading economic power).

            But why pick a particularly disease? You could nationalize all medicine and save everyone!

            These are the questions that poor countries are going to have to ask. They are going to have to balance the temporary benefits from ignoring global IP laws against the damage it will do to the countries own future economy. I'm sure many won't give a damn, and will do whatever is politically expediant.

            Note that nothing is stopping Brazil from taxing its richer inhabitants to pay for AIDS drugs (the top 10% of Brazilians earn nearly 50% of all income), or moving money from its $13 billion/year armed forces budget into public health.

        • As I said before, Brazilian government did allowed a local manufacter to break patent rights. But it didn't really break, since no production has started.

          All this worth because the patent owner now accept to charge as much royalities from Brazilian factories as they charge from American factories.

          No patent was really broken.

  • How to communicate issues? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sinistar2k ( 225578 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:09PM (#2256034)
    Jamie...

    Obviously, the big ticket item is getting the citizenry involved in making changes at a legislative level regarding the liberties that have been traded in the interest of corporate domination. The problem, however, is finding a way to communicate that without spending three days pointing out cases of encroaching corporate control.

    Do you have any tips/suggestions on how an average technology enthusiast such as myself can best go about conveying to the every-day public the sense of urgency surrounding technology issues and the reason such issues should be addressed?

  • Knowledeable Washingtonians? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kvandivo ( 207171 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:10PM (#2256041) Homepage
    Do you find that the people you have to deal with in Washington are relatively knowledeable about issues that we care about such as Linux (and it's distribution model)?

    If not, what are you doing and what do you see can be done to change this?

  • Open Source Future (Score:2, Insightful)

    by the_ph0x` ( 170740 )
    We have obviously come a long way in the name of open source and public education about the need to understand the software you use. However it doesn't seem to have mutch of an effect on the people that count. It truely is a 'way of thinking' and it seem that it is quite difficult to change the way people think.

    In your opinion and observations, what if any future do you see for the open source movements place in the world and its impact on societys ways of thinking?

    .ph0x

  • Technological ability (Score:3, Interesting)

    by astafas ( 232064 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:11PM (#2256049)
    What is the technological ability of the majority of our legislatures? Do they use the computer hardware and software they make the laws for? or do they leave that mostly up to the people that work for them. How much are they themselves in touch with the technology that they affect with their decisions?

  • Patent Issues (Score:5, Interesting)

    by michellem ( 110855 ) <michelle&murrain,net> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:12PM (#2256052) Homepage
    It seems that the patent office has, in the last few years, lost their collective mind. Patents are incredibly broad, or amazingly misdirected, like in the case of the patents on human genes. They currently seem to protect only litigous patent holders, not the consumers or anyone else, for that matter. What is your organization doing to change this current patent landscape? Is there anything that can be done?

  • Free Speech (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nexus Maelstrom ( 100887 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:12PM (#2256053)
    As a University student currently involved with a student group called the Campus Democracy Collective, what is the best way to inform both my peers and goverenment representative that the fight for speech, liberty and freedom from oppression will be fought over bits and bytes, and not how many miles per gallon their car will get?

  • Changing copyright times (Score:3, Interesting)

    by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:13PM (#2256060) Homepage
    What about rolling back the life of a copyright to 25 years instead of having it be the number of years since the creation of Mickey mouse?

    • A good point, but not far enough.

      Instead of just rolling back the life of a copyright to 25 years, as it was when this country was founded, why not also reduce the patent life to 12 or 15 years, and go back to the prior system of "public domain" patents, which used to be the majority of all patents filed, where the patent revenues revert to the US government?

      • Re:Changing copyright and patent lives (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Still not far enough.

        Copyrights on software should expire after maybe 2 or 3 years (perhaps an extension could be purchased for 10% of the gross sales value of the software over the initial 2/3 years). 99% of software sold to consumers if hopelessly obsolete after 5 years; why should it remain out of the public domain?

        • I say that 5-7 would be a better number for software copyrights, and maybe 10 for certain types of software...
          • Well, while suggesting 5, 7, or 10 year copyright lives may sound keen to you young'ns, as someone who has actually published and been paid for writing, I think a 25 year lifespan is sufficient for copyright, but less is not a good idea. Little incentive to take time to craft your work.

            Patents one might be able to argue as being less than 17 years, but it has taken many people up to 5 years to get it to a patent stage, so I'm not as comfortable with making it too short. That defeats the reason for patents - to ensure it becomes published and licensable, instead of hidden as a trade secret. But we do need to use "public domain" patents way more often.

  • What do you see as the current biggest technological threat to personal freedoms and rights?

    And what most threatens the usefulness of the internet and related technologies for the general public?

  • Microsoft Trial (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gorilla ( 36491 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:14PM (#2256070)
    What's the CPT's position on Microsoft's dominance in the desktop market, attempts to obtain the same in the server market, and the trial?

  • Neverending Copyright (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oddjob ( 58114 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:15PM (#2256077)
    The entertainment industry appears able to get copyright protection extended as long as they wish. While not as directly related to technology as patent law, copyright law is becomming more of a concern, especially with the recent mess with the DMCA. Is your organization making any efforts to convice congress to return copyright duration to a sane limit, and if so, is there much hope for success?

    • The entertainment industry appears able to get copyright protection extended as long as they wish ... Is your organization making any efforts to convice congress to return copyright duration to a sane limit, and if so, is there much hope for success?

      Or as sorehands put it:

      What about rolling back the life of a copyright to 25 years instead of having it be the number of years since the creation of Mickey Mouse?

      Good question. I feel that an intellectual monopoly term should last just long enough for the holder to make a return on the intellectual investment. I fail to see many copyrighted works being produced that don't produce the bulk of their revenues within the first 25 years.

      For more explanation of Disney's lobbying for repeated copyright term extensions, read my essay about the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act [everything2.com]. It has some useful links to other information on the topic.

  • In more concrete terms, how does your lobbying budget compare to that of other technology industry lobbyists? Twice as small or twice as big? If your budget is lower, how exactly does this impact your efforts? Do you feel that this hampers your access to elected officials?

  • Restriction of license agreements and uses (Score:3, Interesting)

    by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:17PM (#2256091) Homepage
    What about the restriction of shrinkwrap license agreements. Currently most say, you get a disk, and if you can't read it we will replace it. But, if it does damage, or does not work, you are out of luck.


    What about requiring a publisher that uses content control/copy-protection to provide free replacement/backup media at no charge? This is if they prevent one from making a backup and their is loss.

    • For the short term, it might be OK.

      But what happens when the "ebook" goes out of "print" - or what happens when your 1st edition dies? Do you get the upgraded second edition (and yes, sometimes second edition paper books are MASSIVE upgrades - look at the diff between Gordon McComb's '99 Inexpensive Robotics Projects', 1st edition vs. 2nd Ed. - 1st Ed was done in TAB book style, 2nd in some funky style, but had a ton more info)?

      What happens when the publisher goes out of business - how do you get your backup then?

  • CPRM et al. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bsdbigot ( 186157 )
    What is the general take on further copy-control mechanisms, such as CPRM and CSS, within your lobby, and how do you explain this position to Senators, Congressmen, and the like?
  • For those of you who don't know him. Jamie is a wonderful character. He organized and ran a conference on "Remedies for Microsoft" that I attended about 2 and a half years ago. It was a very insightful conference (the audio is still available on his site).

    What was interesting in this meeting was the talk by Visio's president; who was the most vocal proponent of Microsoft. I got the feeling that he was completely prepared by the Microsfot PR staff. He constantly asserted that Microsoft was even handed and a great business partner. He denied an acquisition was in the works when asked by one of the more pronounced anti-Microsoft people in the audience. He empathatically denied that he was "in-bed" with Microsoft and asserted that Microsoft is very good to _all_ of it's development _partners_. The buy-out, of course, occured shortly there after.

    You may want to ask Jamie about this conference. It was very insightful for me to hear. But there were a suprising lack of technical people there, it was mostly lawyer suits; anti-trust experts. There were only a hand-full of "real" programmers there and we were largely in the audience.

    Best,

    Clark
  • For those who may agree with what you are trying to accomplish: What can be done to help you, and your organization, with your efforts?

  • Patents and the cost of development...? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tenzig_112 ( 213387 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:19PM (#2256107) Homepage
    How does CPT balance fighting patents on drugs (and other technologies) with the cost of developing those technologies?


    Surely, the cost of life-saving medications should not be prohibitive. And dozens of ridiculous patent disputes cannot be good for any industry. But without some means of recouping the often crippling cost of development (for example, 1000s of drugs begin the development process and only a handful make it to the consumer) what incentive is there to investigate new ideas?


    What will happen to the fields of medicine and information technology if the market for invention dries up?

    • Surely, the cost of life-saving medications should not be prohibitive. And dozens of ridiculous patent disputes cannot be good for any industry. But without some means of recouping the often crippling cost of development (for example, 1000s of drugs begin the development process and only a handful make it to the consumer) what incentive is there to investigate new ideas?

      Er, I would like to point out that (1) pharmaceutical companies spend more money on advertising than they do on R (2) they get huge tax breaks on R&D investments; (3) they are among the most profitable companies in the world; (4) they farm out research to universities, who do the grunt work and turn over the patents; (5) some research is gov't funded. The "we have to make up for the developmental failures" argument is pure eyewash. One drug like paxel can underwrite the entire R&D budget of a company. That makes everything else candy.

      mp

      • pharmaceutical companies spend more money on advertising than they do on R&D

        Marketing makes both health care consumers and providers more familiar with new drugs, encouraging their use. Without the level of marketing of pharma companies, many drugs would not reach the people they are intended to help. For example, in the two years that ads for a medicine for erectile dysfunction have appeared, millions of men have seen their doctors to request the drug. And for every million men who asked for the medicine, it was discovered that an estimated 30,000 had untreated diabetes, 140,000 had untreated high blood pressure, and 50,000 had untreated heart disease.

        Also, drug companies would not be as profitable without the marketing. We need to keep in mind that the high profitability of drug companies comes with immense risks. Most drugs never make it to becoming a product. And a single class-action lawsuit can wipe out a company.

        If it you really want to repeal intellectual property laws on drugs, you are going to have to answer this question: Where are new drugs developed, in countries with secure IP laws, or in countries with lax IP laws? Where would you rather live?

        Anyway, if you think marketing is "Candy," have you ever run a retail business??

  • Global (Score:4, Interesting)

    by under_score ( 65824 ) <mishkin@be[ ]ig.com ['rte' in gap]> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:20PM (#2256113) Homepage
    I think it is pretty obvious to everyone here that technology and intellectual property are things which do not work well with the artificial boundaries of nation-states. What sorts of long term strategies does the CPT have for dealing with intellectual property and technology issues at a global level? I am particularly interested in the issues surrounding IP and tech in developing regions.

  • The public cost of copyright (Score:5, Interesting)

    by underwhelm ( 53409 ) <underwhelm@NOsPAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:20PM (#2256118) Homepage Journal
    It seems to me that because copyright is intangible, that the public domain is immeasurable, and because expanding copyright takes no money out of the budget, that IP laws are the pork barrel legislation of the Digital Millennium. Senators and legislators see no problem with enlarging copyright beyond its traditional boundaries, past fair use and first sale, because there is no means of accounting for the theft. Is there a sense in Washington that wrapping new copyright restrictions with a bow and handing them to entertainment conglomerates has no downside politically or economically?

    If this is the case, how can we change the climate in Washington to make our representatives accountable for diminishing the public domain and enlarging copyright?

  • Fair Use (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jmorse ( 90107 ) <joe_w_morse@[ ]p ... m ['nos' in gap]> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:21PM (#2256120) Homepage Journal
    Our so-called leaders continue passing laws that usurp the doctrine of fair use. What is your orghanization doing to combat laws like the DMCA and organizations like the RIAA and MPAA and to keep them from legislating away the rights we once took for granted under copyright law?
  • As a programmer who doesn't lobby, but who appreciates your efforts, I am curious to know what kinds of software we produce makes your job easier.

    What kind of 'attitude' in programming makes it easy to lobby the open source cause? RMS? JWZ? /.? ESR? In other words, what kinds of things can we do in the natural course of programming, which help you do what you do?

    -Water Paradox
  • I have noticed that there are becoming more and more politicians who are at least a little computer savvy (This is not to say that there still aren't quite a lot on the Hill). What are some of the ways that you go about educating the people on Capitol Hill about what is going on?

    -Kenix

  • Patent law opinion (Score:3, Interesting)

    by The Panther! ( 448321 ) <panther@austin.YEATSrr.com minus poet> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:24PM (#2256130) Homepage
    What is your stance on the inadequacies of patent law?
    Do you think it would be more fair (for consumers and developers) to restructure patents so that only IP related to an existing product can be patented?

  • What do you see as being the greatest challenge for your work, and what's the one biggest thing that we can do to make that easier?

    (Okay, it's really two questions...)

  • What's your job really like? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Masem ( 1171 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:24PM (#2256132)
    Whenever I hear the word lobbyist, I think of someone carrying a bag of money to a Congressman, and expecting to get legislation passed; the image is most likely a result of hundreds of political cartoons and editorals. Obviously, this image isn't 100% true, but from what we as citizens hear on daily events in Washington, this doesn't seem like an overexaggration.

    Can you describe what a typical day is for you - for example, do you see Congressmen, how do you influence their voting (finiacal or otherwise), and what do you do when you are NOT on Capitol Hill?

  • Don't you think it would be more effective for your goals to get behind a canadate that may win?
    sure, Nador is great and all, but wouldn't having the cloat of one of the 2 major parties in office be better for your cause?

    and finally, please thank nador for allowing bush to be president. I like being reemed by the energy companies!
  • Mr. Goldstein of 2600 is a big supporter of Hackivism and being political, which is good, since it brings forth the issues which the majority of us sit around a whine about all the time (Sorry people, but I feel this is true).
    I'm sure that you've worked with him from time to time, and have some good ideas about what needs to be done. So what needs to be done?

    Also:

    What are you doing with the political movers and shakers, in terms of the issues and education of technology? Whom do you feel are the most technically savvy politicians in the House and Senate?
    And finally, what do you feel is the worst case possible in the realm of laws (DMCA not withstanding), and how close do you think we'll come to see it?

  • How do you feel fighting for such good ideas like the patent restrictions in AIDS medication, and been a lobbyist?

    Wouldn't be a better idea fight against lobbyist for a more democratic government?

  • I commend your work and am impressed by your educational background. After reviewing your background [cptech.org] and understanding successful lobbyists generally have experience as legislators or as staff to powerful legislators with the establishment of important relationships, however, I am concerned you may not be an effective lobbyist. Do you find the absence of experience as a legislator or working as a senior aide for a powerful legislator (which such experiences create relationships with elected officials) a detriment to your ability to effectively lobby for these important issues?

  • Unified efforts in advocacy. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sergeant Rock ( 204109 ) <sergeant_rock@yahoo.com> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:28PM (#2256146)

    Hi, Jamie. Hopefully I'm asking something that is up your alley and isn't too terribly off-topic ...

    Do you see the possibility of a large, unified force in technology activism in the current lobbyist environment?

    I have noted that, for the most part, those attempting to promote innovation and free exchange of ideas throughout all research and industry seem to have their own agenda. They often have many of the same viewpoints and would pull together if they would allow some of their views to take a backseat to a concerted, unified effort.

    There are a lot of people that have been able to organize themselves into groups, but still grasp divisive issues as defining who they are. Instead they should 'gang up' and try seeing how their numbers can make an impact ...

    A good example of this divisiveness is Slashdot. Most of the people that browse and are coherently active on this site believe that greater competition in the marketplace is a very good thing. Yet they continue to split themselves up into 'factions' (i.e. Mac, Linux, Unix, BSD, etc.) without seeing that any choice but the one that they oppose (Microsoft, for instance) should be a step in the right direction.

    Rock

  • Why do you use Microsoft Windows (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:28PM (#2256147)
    Mr. Love,

    If you are so anti-corporation, and so anti-Microsoft, to the point of publically criticizing them and thier practices, why does the Consumer Project on Technology, and specifically you, Mr. Love, choose to use Microsoft Windows on your office and home machines?

    An informed Anonymous Coward
  • There's been much discussion here, and there is a wealth of info on the CPT site, regarding patents. Some seemingly obvious, some so vague that they include nearly everything, some claiming "invention" of a on-line version of a long-standing business practice, etc. And it appears that the only way any of these patents can be revoked is through court action.

    My question is, what level of success has there been in fighting these patents? Who has expended the effort and funds to take a shot at them? Who has succeeded, who's failed, and what's the outlook for the future?

  • Consumers (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Thordain ( 263078 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:31PM (#2256159)
    Large corporations and comglomerates have lawyers, contacts, and money with which to pursuade industry leaders and law makers. If a few big companies lobby on a particular issue, chances are they will get their way, whether the issue benefits consumers or not (DCMA, et all).

    Consumers do not (generally) have these resources availible. They can't buy marketing campaigns, they don't have dedicated lawyers, and they don't have large sums of money to spend on convincing people that their way is the right way. If twenty major corporations want something, they can usually get it. However, twenty consumers would have no effect whatsoever. My question is, what is the most effective way that consumers can voice their opinion in a way that they will be listened to? Obviously, if more people protested the laws, policies and other things that did not benefit the consumer, things might be changed. However, I think that most people (including myself) feel overwhelmed by the fact that their one voice makes little difference.

  • is there an effort to develop a consumer linux distribution which stresses security, privacy and last but not least simplicity? aol without the commercial implications...
  • What reasons are often cited for organizations continuing to use Microsoft products?

  • Intellectual property changes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by color of static ( 16129 ) <smasters&ieee,org> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:40PM (#2256200) Homepage Journal
    With much of the world moving towards nomarlized intellectual property laws it seems that the rights of the end users are being removed one by one to make each country "conform better" with trading partners. Is it likly that we may loose such things as fair use in the near future, if we haven't already. Sometimes it seems that people have forgotten the reason for Intellectual property protection (in the US atleast), was to allow the creator to make a profit before it became publicly available, not to profit eternally. If all of this really is happening, what can we do to try and change this "evolution" of law and regulation before it goes to far?
  • Is there anyway to make you web site more visually appealing? Gosh, it really hurts my eyes!

  • Outside the US of A (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bfree ( 113420 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:46PM (#2256222)
    I'm not American, but in recent years I have been boycotting many American corporations due to the influence they have on the US legal system and their seemingly inexhaustable ability to gain any IP law they require. I am seriously concerned by the aparently relentless push by US based coporations to bring an American style Intellectual Property regime to the rest of the world. As a Free Software advocate I find few ideas as repellent as "Software Patents"! My question to you is how do you see the International Intellectual Property arguments going, and ultimatley will we reach a system where everyone is under the thumb of software patents or where the US is forced to give up on this terrible idea?
  • If the antitrust suit's remedy is toothless, will the Micro$oft Monitor [netaction.org] be reactivated?

    In the M$ Monitor's goodbye message, the author alluded to other news/coordination resources that were duplicating the M$ Monitor's function. What are these resources?

    I miss the M$ Monitor. Of course, if I have to choose between having the Monitor back and having an effective penalty against Microsoft, I'll choose the latter. :)

  • The general public doesn't understand technology, thinks the third world causes all of their own problems, and thinks that people who oppose patents in any way are communists. That's tough to overcome.

    How do you go about convincing the public that anything you advocate is good?

  • Consumerism == Big Government == Opression (Score:4, Insightful)

    by brsett ( 169637 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @01:51PM (#2256248)
    Consumerism is a simple form of a protectionist government. Doesn't protectionist government invariably lead to the infringement upon personal liberties? Doesn't it also lead to a more litigious society?

    A simple scenario, in order to protect consumers, you may choose to make all cars come with airbags, and have the safety of a Camry. A) What if I'm poor, and cannot afford a Camry, but I can afford a Geo. Am I SOL, or does the goverment buy me a Camry (Socialism)? B) I'm not afraid of death and I like 1960's sports cars, with horrific safety ratings (Corvairs, e.g.). Will I be able to obtain one (keeping in mind that if I die, my family would retain the right to sue the manufacturer under many protectionist schemes)?

    (One can easily draw up a similar scenario with cigarettes to see how I made up these examples).

  • I see that the www.cptech.org website is using Red Hat. Do you also use Red Hat on the desktop? KDE or GNOME? (or something else?) Staroffice? Abiword? MySQL? IMP or Squirrelmail?

    We're obviously nerds here and we'd love to hear about the network layout at CPT.

    Cheers..........

  • how can I help? (Score:3, Redundant)

    by tunesmith ( 136392 ) <[siffert] [at] [museworld.com]> on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @02:00PM (#2256290) Homepage Journal
    If we want to start doing what you are doing, how
    and where do we start? How can we get involved?
    I mean beyond just writing letters to our congresscritters.


    tune

  • If the average person on the street knew that one of the results of the current trends will be that they cannot fast forward or edit out commercials that are on the movies that they rent or buy, the corporations would not stand a chance.

    Unfortunately the average person really does not care about rights or free speech, since they don't think it would interfere with anything they do.

    We need to communicate the effects in simple concrete examples like "you will not be able to skip commercials" in order to get the public to change their mind or even care. Is anything being done about this?

  • Effective technology lobbying and activism for DMC (Score:5, Informative)

    by melquiades ( 314628 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @02:09PM (#2256352) Homepage
    I'm part of the group that's organizing the DMCA protests in Minnesota. We're passing out fliers and staging protests, but haven't managed to get any press. We're also trying to get a face-to-face meeting with our senators...but no luck so far -- their offices haven't even called us back, despite both written and phoned requests for a meeting.

    The problem is, we're technology people, not activists, and we don't know how to lobby effectively. What's your advice? How can we get the attention of our senators? How can we attract media attention (in a respectful way, that is)? Are there other activities we should be undertaking that would be more effective than what we're doing?
    • There's a great, short book [amazon.com] explaining how citizens can make themselves heard and bring about change. Don't be turned off by its title. It's an excellent read by a man who was very influential in his day. Having read it, I can imagine that someone in your position could get quite a few ideas out of it. It's not a direct answer, but I hope it helps.

  • consumers and quality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tim_maroney ( 239442 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @02:15PM (#2256398) Homepage
    Ralph Nader's consumer advocacy has always been first and foremost about quality, of which safety is a subset. Given that the commercial operating systems (MacOS and Windows) are much more user-friendly than the current slate of Linux offerings, and that even many Linux advocates have now come around to admitting that fact, how does Linux advocacy benefit the consumer? Isn't it strange for a consumer advocacy organization to be advocating a lower-quality product over a higher-quality one?

    Tim
    • First of all user friendly is not the same as better quality. The fact you seem to confuse the two indicates how little you have thought about this issue.

      Secondly Linux is not "harder to use" it's simply "not familiar enough". It's really not much harder to use linux then windows. To a beginner they are equally baffling set of analogies. Go get your grandma to look at your toolbar and tell you what each one of those cryptic icons do. I will give a hundred dollars if she can even name all the objects represented in the icons.

      Thirdly Advocating linux benefits the consumer by breaking the chokehold on innovation that MS has. It also benefits the consumer by saving billions of tax dollars that are spent by the govt on software licenses. It makes no sense for the govt to simutaneously find MS guilty of criminal behavious and reward them with govt contracts.
  • Why hasn't any suggested legislation that mandates that after a period of time all published software be released into the public domain?

    I do see the place for non-free software, but I think it would be benificial for software to be freely available after it's ability to generate profit is exhausted.

    This would serve more than the obvious purposes, it would allow for software be kept in a repository, and not lost after it's served it's purpose. Software is part of our culture today, and unless we actively preserve it, we're going to loose pieces of our history. We certainly can't count on the companies currently responsible for this software to keep around old versions or programs that don't make money.

    Wouldn't a national software library serve us well in the future, sure, there'd be a lot of junk there, but the same can be said for the Library of Congress.
  • What can your average "user" or programmer do, to create a more balanced social and legal environment?


    It would seem that as "Intellectual Property" rights have been increased, consumer protection has declined. It's my belief that the two are inter-twined. The more consumers can know about what they're consuming, the harder it is for companies to claim innocence, or push the problem back on the consumer.


    At present, the consumer has NO right to know if the program they buy will do what they expect, or that it will even work, or even that it won't simply transfer the consumer's bank account to the original company. Examining the binary code could violate the DMCA, making it illegal to even find out. If transferring the consumer's account activates the software's licence, then removing the code would also violate the DMCA.


    Since most shrink-wrap licences provide no warranty and exempt the company from any liability due to any damage caused by use of the software, to use most commercial software, you have to agree that ANY malicious code in that software is entirely fair and reasonable.


    Users might as well sign over their first-born child, all their worldly goods, their soul and half of anything they acquire in Heaven.

  • I've actually got quite a bit of political experience (an internship at a state capital, paid staff on many campaigns, volunteer work at the state party level, and currently a political director for a consulting firm) so I know how to actually contact a legislator and how to lobby them, but I can't help but feel helpless regarding tech issues. I'm not a lobbyist (yet) and as a constituent, my voice is pretty small.

    I'm not normally against corporations having input with government (somebody has to employ all of the citizens,) but in the tech arena, legislators seem to be absolutely cowed to the industry. If a gas company went to a legislator to push a "Gas EULA" at the pump, the legislator would laugh the lobbyist out of the office, but tech companies come along and legislators can't wait to get behind them.

    How's the best way to get it through their thick skulls that the DMCA radically alters copyrights to the benefit of large corporations, that the UCITA steals consumer's rights, and see the budget savings by using more open software? How can you make them see that the short-sighted legislation that they're passing at the bequest of corporate interests are so damaging to the citizens?

    -sk

  • Recently we've been seeing articles on the 'open source only, for government use' initiatives that are taking place around the world (primarily in South America). I have also heard the discussions of similar actions among some municipal governments in the U. S. Are there any agencies in the federal government considering a similar shift in policy?

  • Targeting Bible Belt Republicans (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JCCyC ( 179760 ) on Wednesday September 05, 2001 @02:45PM (#2256577) Journal
    Couldn't you show to all those nice, God-Fearing, apple-pie Bible Belt Moral Majority Republicans how the DMCA helps Scientology [xenu.net] silence its critics? Also, the Hollywood connection Scientology has (Travolta, Cruise etc.) makes a nice picture (those smut-peddling godless pornographers from California are in league with an anti-Christian sect to undermine the Constitution for their Satanic profit!!!)

    Disclaimer: the above is not necessarily my opinion, but it might be an effective angle. Unless those so-called "Christians" actually value money more than God.
    • This is a very good point. More broadly, the socially conservative wing of the GOP has traditionally been opposed to the entertainment industry, claiming that they are debasing public morality by airing too much sex and violence. I personally think that view is silly (the public is getting exactly what it wants), but it should be possible to use that perception to build Republican opposition to the DMCA, since it was passed at the behest of the alleged moral polluters.
  • ...when it starts affecting them personally. What are good examples of things that mainstream people enjoy doing that would be hampered by increasingly restrictive legislation? And I don't mean Napster, I mean something that most people would consider perfectly legal.
  • The limited liability corporation is a technology which is not doing what it's supposed to do---their chartering "for the public good" is universally ignored, in the sense that no corporation has been de-chartered for violations of this condition. Not subject to death or illness as real people are, they are much more like the empathy-free, predatory, androids of P.K. Dick, or the vampires so popular in the fiction of recent decades. Free from the normal human constraints of shame and fear of imprisonment, they seem almost inevitably to end up as bad actors to the extent they can be considered to exist at all.

    At the very least, these collectives shouldn't have the cloak of the civil rights proper to human beings; is there any prospect for this situation to be changed? This would go a long way to reducing the ability of the actual persons within them to escape full responsibility for their actions, to cloak their self-interest in the fulfillment of their fiduciary obligations, and to hide the contributions they direct toward the political parties.

    Thanks for your time, and please tell Ralph to stay home next time.
  • If I was an US citizen I'd do those myself. Like in India, I think it would be most effective if done in great numbers. The final goal would be, of course, a hearing by the Supreme Court.

    1) Protesting the DMCA: Purchase a CSS-encrypted DVD, preferrably of a region other than 1. Get a notebook with a DVD-ROM and make it able to play the disc, thus violating the DMCA. Go to a public place, make your speech and play the DVD for a few seconds to show it works. Distribute copies of the software (DeCSS, Linux player, crack for Windows player, whatever).

    2) Protesting the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act: with the same hardware above, purchase a movie that should be public domain by now but isn't (Chaplin for instance). Go out, make your speech and distribute copies of the MOVIE itself (or announce an URL for download).

    3) Protesting the DMCA II, the Sequel: Distribute copies of Elcomsoft's Advanced eBook Processor (the software that got Dmitry in jail). Public place, speech, etc, etc. Cheaper -- all it takes is diskettes (or CDs).

    • Protesting the DMCA: [play an out-of-region DVD or a protected eBook on a laptop in a public place and distribute the tools]. Protesting the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act: with the same hardware above, [play old Mickey Mouse films and put them on edonkey].

      This is the kind of civil disobedience that the Barely Legal Project [everything2.com] does.

  • Who do you think will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes?[1]

    A quick shout out to all my peeps in the NSA, DIA and FBI. Peace, y'all

    [1] Please, no Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy mentions.
  • As someone who has been reading /. for the longest time, but only posting/replying for a short time, I can honestly say that the two are equivalent.

    For instance: I see a post that said what I said a while back, granted it was a little more eloquent. But it comes down to "the only people who can change the laws are those with money (corps. ect) OR those that have been harmed by them irreparably.
    OR
    Where the judges that were being monitored I asked "who's watching the watchers".
    I thought that was a damn good question.
    Of course what are the congresspeople/ moderators smoking comments too.

    More on topic than above:
    IS the DMCA unconstitutional?
    has harm been proven via the current case load in the courts with 2600, Felten, and a few other cases I can't recall.
    If I recall correctly, most of the major law makers/ IVY league schools, professors said in effect "this is bad law making" and it got pushed through despite the fact.

    Has there been any investigations or litigation into the MPAA/RIAA's actions against consumers by buying/pushing laws such as these. (congressional oversight, general hearing, tribuneral, something that says "woah, hold on there cowboy, this is getting out of hand"?).

    What can those of us in the university environment, as techs, do to raise awareness among those "joe 6packs" average consumers of these bad laws?

    Moose.

    ps. In summation: "help!! help!!! I'm being opressed!!" -Montey Python
  • Hey Jamie --

    I'm a young technologist with a zeal for government and a few degrees in computer science and mathematics. How do I get a job doing what you do (and an entry level)? What can I do in the mean time to increase my chances? Would a degree in public policy or law help? Would experience in Washington help? Would wearing a penguin tie help?

    What can I do to end up on a career path like yours?

  • Who owns the law? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ccarr.com ( 262540 )
    Jamie,

    Before becoming a developer I was a law librarian, and I had the pleasure of seeing you debate a representative of West Publishing over the issue of their asserted copyright to reporter pagination. I think this is an issue that Slashdotters would be interested in, but I haven't seen it discussed much here.

    Briefly: West (since bought by Thompson) publishes nearly all court reporters in the US. Courts require page citation to earlier decisions in any documents that parties submit for their consideration. Obviously West can't claim a copyright to the decisions since the courts authored them, but they do assert a copyright to the page breaks in their reporters. So directly or indirectly, each litigant must pay West a license for citing case law.

    It seems to me that this issue in some ways presaged the fair use issues raised by the DMCA. The trend seems to be toward rights without remedies. Yes case law is in the public domain but you can't use it in court. Yes you have a fair use right to digital media, but you can't circumvent technology aimed at thwarting that right.

    My question: do you agree that this is a trend, and do you see it continuing?

    ccarr.com
  • If they do, do they get the 'perks' that Washington politicians evidently get from their interns ? If so, could you provide details about 'working' with such interns ? Or provide us with JPEGs/MPEGs ? Do you have any plans to stream videos of your Christmas parties on the Net ?
  • Given the movie Wag the dog was concerned with esentially Political PR do You see any Irony in the name of the website Microsofts PR firm has and the nature of the technology industries influence on current politics? While I'm sure there is no link it's almost too close to the truth.
  • I'm a biochemical engineer with possible future opportunities to patent true innovation (something actually new *gasp*). The question lies in where is the line between the healthy protection of the work you've put into creating something new and the stifling of the creativity of the industry if you should patent your innovation and restrict its use in return for money.

    I think anyone who creates something new and useful should receive full recognition and some payment for others' use of it, but how does one do this while letting future innovators build upon and improve your creation? If you restrict use too highly, you remove any possibility of someone else being able to improve upon what you have done. If you allow free access, you might receive some recognition, but companies will definately attempt to screw you over.

    Now, insert the company or university I might be working for to further complicate the problem, and add a few lawyers to make it serious. What can an engineer do to make sure something he creates has patent restrictions that reflects his personal opinions or economic viewpoint. (It might be in the favor of the engineer to allow improvement upon the innovation.)

    Salis
  • Ive had the argument with my college friends, majoring in government, about corporations and thier pull in goverment via lobbying. After a bit, most of them simply say the goernment is for the corporations. When I ask them what about the ppl they just shrug. Because the free software movement and other computer user groups dont have the money to lobby does that mean all is lost?
  • What are some of the "leverage points" which you see as most useful to the cause.. I.e. where can we put in effort that will be most multiplied in effect by the time it gets to the people that you're lobbying?

    What sort of things are they most sensitive to, and what sorts of things get ignored because they hit the thickest parts of their skins?

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close