With fourteen articles to run through tonight, a near record, I don’t have time to waste. We’ll start with Joshua Trevino bringing us Bill Peacock on the Texas Amazon Tax . Texas SB 1 contains the tax Governor Perry already vetoed this session, and it needs defeated again. Says Peacock: “Gov. Perry was right to veto the Amazon tax bill, and he’d be right if he did it again. Staying focused on downsizing Texas government is the only way to keep Texas as the top job producing state in the nation.” In national bills that need stopped, patent reform still looms over our heads . This bill,t he America Invents Act, removes patent protection from the person who first invents a thing. Instead, patent protection goes to the person who first files papers with the government for the invention. Is it any wonder that patent mills like IBM, and lawyers groups like the ABA have fallen in love with it? Another bad bill by Patrick Leahy is PROTECT IP, which would create a national censorship blacklist of sites deemed to threaten copyright or trademark interests. It’s so bad that even the LA Times has come out against it , which is notable given that the MPAA is a major force behind the bill. However Senate Republicans have rolled over and let it advance. We’ve got to get the House to do better and defeat this. Senator Leahy isn’t stopping with the AIA or PROTECT IP, either. Now he’s continuing the terrible practice of targeting crime victims with laws seeking to punish the victims of breakins. So terrible. As I said Monday night, we need to put the perpetrators in jail, not hassle the victims. To keep the focus on the victims actually rewards the criminals by putting pressure on their enemies. I hate to say it but Senator Schumer may have the right idea . Now, Schumer may be targeting drugs with his plans to go after Bitcoin, but as I previously covered cyberterror groups like Lulzsec also use the currency to fund their operations. Remove some financial incentives to break the law, and only good can come of that. Now I’m not saying I necessarily approve of the specific plans Schumer has, but conceptually I much prefer going after the funding sources of crime than going after the victims. In other cybersecurity news, not surprisingly I disagree with Google. Google supports efforts by Democrats to expand the role of Government online to place laws and regulations on security outside the role of critical infrastructure. However I believe it’s only in critical infrastructure and civil defense that there’s a justification under the Constitution and in common sense for the government to have a role at all. And speaking of civil defense, I’m staying out on that limb and supporting efforts to hand out spectrum without auction . I mean, of the four names voting no on the bill (Olympia Snowe, Jim DeMint, Pat Toomey, and Marco Rubio), I have no problems with three of them. I respect them, but I disagree. Not all policy decisions are easy. Civil defense spectrum and the post-9/11 recommendations are one of them. the fringe of copyright are another . I favor copyright, and I’m not about to support eliminating it specifically for foreign works just because it inconveniences some ivory tower academics and performers. I’m all for broad-based, fair copyright reductions, but not special case giveaways. On the other hand, some issues are easy, and it’s nice to get a big win in them. So I’m celebrating a win by House Republicans Fred Upton and Greg Walden who have reached and agreement with the FCC to remove the Fairness Doctrine from the books. No more will it linger, threatening free speech. Elections have consequences. Quick hits to finish out the night: Attention continues on Free Press’s failure to cooperate with Marsha Blackburn’s investigation into the neo-Marxist front group’s funding. Free Press’s Derek Turner testified that “Absolutely, I’d be pleased to, yes,” when asked to submit the group’s funding sources. Meanwhile, the world waits. Greg Walden is warming up on AT&T/T-Mobile and the Universal Service Fund . He’s smartly not showing his cards early, but I’m expecting he’ll be a strong ally going forward of those of us who favor small government online and off. Who’s responsible for blocking tethering apps on Android ? Verizon or Google? Either way, critics of Apple who have held up Google as promoting an open platform alternative have egg on their faces. Google’s embrace-and-extend of online standards continues with its new AuthorRank proposal for tracking authors of online works. I’m not saying it’s a bad idea, but we do need to watch for why Google wouldn’t go through open channels to propose new standards, instead of promoting them by corporate fiat.
Read the original here:
Tech at Night: A lot of tech legislation I hate, and a big win against the Fairness Doctrine
I’ve been meaning to write about Sprint and the alliance it’s making with the shady, fringe left. Well, since that alliance is against AT&T, and trying to bring government down on AT&T, they’ve started to do the work for me with their myth busting posts. Part 1 takes down fringe left group Public Knowledge and its testimony to the Senate. AT&T illustrates how absurd it is to criticize the firm for planning to run three networks in parallel: “2G” GSM, “3G” UTMS/HSPA, and “4G” LTE. Guys, this is why we need more spectrum: innovation and growth. But, the radical left would rather we all suffer just to lash out for socialism. Tech transitions take time. AT&T points out that when the FCC-mandated end of life came for “1G” analog cellular service, there were a million of their customers still using it. Just imagine how many people would be disrupted if the radical left imposed an arbitrary end of life for GSM! AT&T’s myth busting Part 2 takes on Sprint directly . You may recall that Sprint went to the FCC demanding cheap and easy access to its competitors’ networks (via “data roaming”), a request the FCC granted, resulting in Verizon suing. Well, Sprint previously argued that this access, even before the FCC order, was sufficient to make it unnecessary for Sprint to improve its own network, while now Sprint argues the AT&T/T-Mobile deal must not go through because it allegedly endangers its access to buy service for its customers. Says AT&T: “For whatever reason, Sprint has chosen to lease rather than to build. But that is a strategic decision by Sprint, not a reason for government regulation or intervention here.” Speaking of competition, Chuck Grassley wants to smother LightSquared in the crib and deny Americans that much more competition. Pair of quick hits to close out the night: Our old neo-Marxist friends at Free Press are so far left that they’re being excluded from the Sprint/fringe left coalition against AT&T. Wow. Even the left is realizing that “Free Press is utterly unworthy of consideration or affiliation.” Unfortunately the FCC is still infected with the radical ideology Free Press has been flogging: Wouldn’t it have been fantastic if the FCC had adhered to the PRA – and engaged the process before, rather than after? Wouldn’t it have been even more fantastic if the FCC had adhered to their legal limits – and never in the first place voted themselves wired and wireless Internet Overlords? Indeed it would have.
Link:
Tech at Night: AT&T smacks down Public Knowledge and Sprint, FCC and Free Press exposed
Hello! As is my right, I’m going to start tonight by shamelessly promoting my own piece arguing for the assignment of the D block of wireless spectrum to civil defense and public safety. I keep calling it civil defense because we learned about the need for this after 9/11, and if the actions of the first responders after those attacks wasn’t wartime civil defense, I don’t know what is. I know some (but certainly not all) libertarian-leaning Republicans oppose this plan, despite or even because the 9/11 commission chairmen have come out for it . But I’m of the view that there are legitimate government roles in society, and that not all things must be (or even should be) sold or given off to the private sector. Civil defense is one of those that is perfectly fine in government hands. Lot of things going on with Google right now. Google settled with the FTC over the Buzz privacy holes . Poorly tested software with a flawed design released too much information about too many people. So what do they do? Keep on trucking, of course. Gmail is going to track and store more information about you for advertising purposes, while Google’s new “+1″ service asks users to tell Google what websites you like, hoping you’ll trust them this time. Google’s also getting into the ISP business even deeper by announcing plans to roll out fiber in Kansas City. Plenty of opportunity for data mining in that line of business. Amazon rolled out a new service*, too , offering online-accessible music storage. Some RIAA members want to leverage copyright law to hinder this innovation though. Unfortunate. Netflix continues its descent into pure looterdom: constantly seeking to free ride off of the investments of others. By kicking up a political fuss every time an ISP announces reasonable, common-sense bandwidth caps, moving us closer to the necessary state of everyone paying for what we use, Netflix tries to win itself subsidy at everyone else’s expense. But the game is up, as they’ve revealed they’re perfectly capable of reducing their bandwidth use when pressed. The FCC is spending lots more money on media relations . I take that as an admission that their regulatory activities are out of bounds and need defending. It turns out we have a coming deficit of wireless spectrum to handle the growing demand for wireless data. People say they want lots of unlimited download, but how will we support it? Some Republicans oppose taking more spectrum away from broadcast television , which certainly limits our options. What will we do, then? Francis Cianfrocca shared some security thoughts with us over at Bayshore Networks . The company’s Founder and CEO, as well as one of RedState’s contributors, hopes his industry will do a better job of doing its job than Detroit’s auto makers did. I don’t blame him. Some socialist students in Argentina gave Hugo Chavez an award . For Press Freedom. Because he closed most every media outlet that criticized his Revolution. I’m not kidding when I say groups like Free Press also believe that stuff is good for America. * Tech at Night’s strict rules forbid me to use the vague, overused buzzword contained in the service’s new name.
Go here to read the rest:
Tech at Night: Civil Defense in the D Block, Hugo Chavez, Google, Netflix, Amazon
Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, has put out a two pronged announcement of what America needs conservatives to achieve when it comes to the the Internet, new technologies, and the regulation of them all. It’s fun to watch just how strong she’s come out on these critical issues. First she had a very well-written piece in the Washington Times explaining how the Internet and related tech issues have gone from a “niche in public policy” to being essential “to keep America free and prosperous.” She gives a great overview of the problems with the FCC and Net Neutrality, then goes on to explain how she, Fred Upton, and other Republicans can do something about it. It’s worth a read, or a link, if you ever need a summary of where we stand today. The big story though came the next day, when she gave the keynote address to the State of the Net conference held by the Congressional Internet Caucus advisory committee . That’s where she drew the line, bright and clear. The Congressional Internet Caucus is a bipartisan caucus, and the advisory committee is just as diverse. So when Blackburn stood up in front of them and made an uncompromising case for freedom and against the radical regulatory agenda, it was not necessarily a friendly venue. She did it anyway. She spoke not only of the bipartisan consensus in Congress against the radicals like (Advisory Committee member) Free Press… The FCC thought they were pushing into a regulatory vacuum last month when they unveiled their net neutrality rules. They may find soon that they stumbled into a Congressional hurricane. No one, Republican or Democrat, Congressman or Commissioner, believes that these new regulations are also the final word. They are the first draft many regulations to come. And as the rules are revised and revised and revised, they create instability, unpredictability- the greatest of all disincentives to investment. …but Blackburn also emphasized what conservatives ought to remember in this and the next fight, and the one after that: Beginning with the coming repeal of the FCC overreach, Conservatives should apply our philosophy to the broader arena of tech policy. We must do so in the spirit of our classic defense of free markets and property rights while guarding against needless regulation and federal intervention. Blackburn leaves no room for doubt. She wants to repeal the FCC’s Net Neutrality power grab. She wants to stand for freedom and property against expanding government. For that, she deserves our support and encouragement.
Read this article:
Marsha Blackburn declares war
The new Congress is in session, and while some people are supremely interested in badmouthing the new Republican leadership, I’m more interested in trying to work with the Republicans to oppose the actual bad things being done by the Obama administration. I don’t have time to complain about past votes. Because guess what? Republicans who were previously bad under the Democrats can turn out good now that we’re in charge. Because the fact is, the new, unprecedented, illegal Net Neutrality regulations are in fact a confused mess. In particular, the rules on paid prioritization on the Internet are so muddled that the whole thing is probably going to get tossed as soon as the FCC tries to stomp the boot of regulation onto anyone (which might be Comcast, because everyone knows the Democrats hate Comcast and the radicals are still going to be fuming about the NBC Universal/Comcast merger). Also, Netflix itself my run afoul of the new regulations . That’s right, poor widdle Netflix, supposedly the victim of big, bad ISPs, is probably in violation of the new regulations. Heh. No, really. Here’s what Steve Effros says over at Digital Society: Here’s how Art Brodsky, of Public Knowledge, defined it: “The issue is whether the company providing the network can favor one company’s content over another’s on the basis of a financial arrangement, i.e., payoff, so that one service works better than another on the Internet.” Well, I hate to have to break it to you, Art, but Netflix just made a financial arrangement so that its service works better, and is easier and quicker to access by consumers than any other “over the top” video delivery on the Internet while you were looking the other way! Oops. So already this whole concept of Net Neutrality is already standing in the way of innovation and convenience for people. Isn’t that just swell? Don’t you feel so protected by big government, now that their rules, as written, stand in the way of putting a Netflix button on your television? And as warned in the last Tech at Night installment, the drumbeat against cable providers continues . I told you they hate Comcast. They also hate the idea that we have competition, because competition undermines the legitimacy of FCC intervention in the market. So they have to manufacture false claims that there isn’t really any competition. But seriously, how unnecessary was this whole Net Neutrality sham? The FCC is having to advertise to try to drum up test cases, because there aren’t any real cases out there. I advertised in this post’s title that we’ve actually done some deregulation recently. Barack Obama signed the Local Community Radio Act, which supposedly further deregulates low power radio broadcasts from the previous acts of 2007 and 2005. I’m concerned about the bill because Free Press supported it. I think we need to watch and wait. If the LPFM stations interfere with important stations, we need to push for a rollback on the licensing. If they don’t, then I’m all for deregulation and expansion of the right of people to broadcast within their communities. Remember when Bob Parks called out James Rucker of ColorOfChange.org? Well, Rucker is quitting that position now that he’s been exposed as a shill for CREDO Mobile. Conservative grassroots activism strikes again.
Read the original here:
Tech at Night: Deregulation(!), Regulation, Cable TV
