CONTENTS

[1] U.S. Supreme Court Hears Arguments in MGM v. Grokster
[2] USACM Calls for Stronger Cybersecurity in Power Plants
[3] Experts Begin Voter-Registration Database Study
[4] Momentum Turns Toward Privacy Protection
[5] Legislation on the Move
[6] Innovation Finds Another Champion
[7] Events to Watch In April
[8] About USACM

[An archive of all previous editions of Washington Update is available here.]
(more…)

“The battle over online music piracy is usually presented as David versus Goliath: the poor student in his dorm hunted down by a music conglomerate. It is easy, in that matchup, to side with the student. But when the Supreme Court takes up the issue this week, we hope it considers another party to the dispute: individual creators of music, movies and books, who need to keep getting paid if they are going to keep creating. If their work is suddenly made “free,” all of society is likely to suffer.

[…] The technology community has rallied to Grokster’s defense. Its most radical members argue that “information wants to be free” online and disparage the whole idea of intellectual property. A more modest argument, and one Grokster relies on in court, is that if it loses, there will be a chilling effect on technological innovation […]”

SOURCE: NY Times

Note: USACM recently signed onto an amicus brief with sixty law professors in support of Grokster in the MGM v. Grokster case that will be argued before the Supreme Court tomorrow.

“The entertainment industry is taking its battle against illegal downloading to America’s Supreme Court. But attacking the technology behind file-sharing could stifle innovation without tackling the industry’s long-term problems […]

THE music business should have stuck by Thomas Edison’s technology if it wanted to avoid the threat of piracy. His wax cylinders could record a performance but could not be reproduced; that became possible only with the invention of the flat-disc record some years later. On Tuesday March 29th, America’s Supreme Court will begin to hear testimony in a case brought by the big entertainment companies that is intended to stop the illegal downloading of copyright-protected music and film. The industry’s target is the peer-to-peer (P2P) technology that allows the swapping of files directly over the internet. The defendants in the case are two firms that make file-sharing software: StreamCast Networks and Grokster […]”

SOURCE: The Economist

Originally Posted: (3/17/05) – Understanding the fundamentals underlying a debate often provides useful insight into policymakers’ thinking about an issue. Over the past two days, two different events highlighted a fundamental part of the MGM vs. Grokster debate. On Tuesday, the conservative Heritage Foundation held an event titled “Government’s Role In Protecting Constitutional Rights in Intellectual Property (IP)”. The keynote speakers, former Attorney General Edwin Messe and former Solicitor General Theodore Olsen, drove home their view that there is no difference between real property (land, buildings, etc.) and IP. On Wednesday, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) held the rebuttal event titled “IP & Creativity”. Gary Shaprio, the President of CEA, kicked off the event by persuasively describing all the reasons why IP is different than real property.

While this post doesn’t really answer the underlying question (USACM has already chosen a side in this debate), my point is to shine some light into how policymakers think about this issue. Influencing deeply held philosophical beliefs is difficult, but making the cases made in our amicus brief, on MGM vs. Grokster and the one filed by the “Computer Science Professors” is critical for informing Members of Congress there is more going on here than just protecting property against squatters. (more…)

“MARYLAND VOTERS will never know for sure whether their election choices last year were recorded correctly – and the same uncertainty could haunt them next year if lawmakers again fail to address a serious defect in the touch-screen voting machines used throughout the state. When functioning properly – and the state elections administrator, Linda H. Lamone, insists that nearly all the machines did work last time – they are said to be as accurate as they are efficient. But without a paper trail showing each vote cast, who’s to know? [emphasis added] And what about the machines that did freeze or had mechanical problems? Voters should not have to take it on faith; yet as it stands, there is no way to conduct a solid recount or audit […]”

SOURCE: Washington Post

Note: ACM issued a statement in 2004 calling for, among other things, improved reliability, security, and verifiability of public elections.

In a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), USACM advocates for stronger cybersecurity in power plants across the nation. The letter points out the critical role of computer-controlled safety systems in today’s power plants and the importance of securing these systems:

(more…)

The Ides of March have come and gone, and apparently considering themselves safe, Senators have finally (and formally) organized the Senate Judiciary Committee. As we previously reported, Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT) will chair a newly created Senate Intellectual Property Subcommittee, which gives IP issues their own forum in an otherwise busy committee. Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn has perhaps the most apt quote, “If you thought Hatch was going to ride off into the sunset and not participate in this issue, you’re not in touch with reality.”

The Washington Post has a full story on yesterday’s organization hearing, which includes some not very surprising comments from Chairman Hatch about dealing with P2P issues. He also said the patent reform will be a priority, which isn’t really a surprise, but will probably prove difficult given the history of the issue.

One interesting quote from The Washington Post story was from Senator Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) spokesperson:

While phishing is pretty well known on the Hill, pharming is not. It is a bit surprising to see this come up during an organization meeting, although Senator Leahy just introduced the Anti-phishing Act of 2005 (S. 472). The bill establishes stronger criminal penalities for people caught phishing and is written broadly enough to probably catch pharming. Of course you have to actually catch these people and a recent Wall Street Journal article (subscription required) points out the obvious problem with the legislation:

USACM member Ed Fleten recently posted his take on pharming and pointed out some technology-based solutions to the problem.

The White House released the long-awaited President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) report on cybersecurity today. The report, titled Cyber Security: A Crisis of Prioritization, calls for more funding for cybersecurity R&D and refocusing of the current R&D portfolio.

Peter at CRA posted more detail on the report and is following this issue and report closely.

Peter Harsha at the Computing Research Association reports, The House Science Committee marked up the High-Performance Computing Act on Thursday. The bill is almost the same as last year, when it passed the House but died in the Senate. USACM formally commented on the merits of the legislation to Science Committee Chairman Boehlert.

The sponsors are more optimistic that they will be able to get the bill to President Bush’s desk this Congress. Considering they have two years to do so, it is a relatively safe bet.

Apparently the only sticking point at yesterday’s markup was the rejection of an amendment offered by Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) to investigate the “cultural and social implications” of artificial intelligence.

One thing became crystal clear during this week’s hearings involving the leaders of information brokers ChoicePoint and LexisNexis (among others) by a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee and the Senate Banking Committee (here and here): namely, the intent of policymakers to take action toward regulating the information brokerage industry. Indeed, the question now is less about whether Congress will decide to regulate this industry and more about the nature and scope of such regulation.
(more…)

The Business Section of today’s Washington Post has an interesting article suggesting that federal regulators are pushing industry harder on cybersecuity.

Some strong words from powerful policymakers in a NY Times article today:

As reported yesterday, the Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing this afternoon on ID theft. Senator Leahy is expected to testify.

LexisNexis, a large international provider of legal and business data, announced today that it, too, had recently been the vicitim of identity thieves. A Washington Post article this afternoon describes how “data on 32,000 consumers was fraudulently gathered in a series of incidents.” Among the data were such things as names, addresses, Social Security numbers and drivers’ license numbers. This incident is the latest in a string of such disclosures that has Washington’s IT policy and privacy communities abuzz.
(more…)

U.S. Rep. Mary Bono’s (R-CA) “Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act (or “SPY ACT") passed another hurdle earlier today as the full House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing to mark up H.R. 29. The measure has fairly wide bipartisan support and counts 58 cosponsors as of this writing.
(more…)

“Have you ever wondered what good it does when they look at your driver’s license at the airport? Let me assure you, as a former bureaucrat partly responsible for the 1996 decision to create a photo-ID requirement, it no longer does any good whatsoever.

[…] Congress is debating the Real ID bill [click here for more] in part because many states have been issuing real driver’s licenses, complete with the hidden security features, to people who have established their identities using phony birth certificates or fake Social Security cards. Indeed, some 9/11 hijackers obtained real driver’s licenses using false documents. The Real ID bill has, however, provoked negative reaction from those who think it has little to do with terrorism and a lot to do with making life difficult for illegal immigrants. While the bill has passed the House, it faces difficulty in the Senate. If portions of it do pass, it will mean that the next time you apply for a driver’s license, you may need substantial proof that you are who you claim to be […]”

SOURCE: NY Times Magazine

“[…] For years, fears of identity theft and improper disclosure of private information have fueled calls for tighter regulation of the mountains of personal data now electronically available to employers, insurance companies, lenders and others. Those anxieties have risen since ChoicePoint revealed last month that alleged identity thieves had duped the company into selling the names, addresses and Social Security numbers and other data on tens of thousands of people. Then last week, Bank of America said it had lost backup computer tapes containing private data on 1.2 million holders of government-issued credit cards, including most members of the U.S. Senate. (more…)

USACM signed onto a Supreme Court amicus brief with sixty law professors in support of Grokster in the case of MGM vs. Grokster. MGM studios sued Grokster arguing that Grokster should be held liable for users downloading copyrighted material using their peer-to-peer software. This argument, if accepted, would overturn the landmark “Sony decision,” which created a safe harbor for companies to innovate and has been heralded as the “Magna Carta” of the information technology industry. (For more detailed background visit EFF’s webpage dedicated to the subject.) The following is a summary of our argument:

“This case is fundamentally about technology policy, not about file sharing or copyright infringement. Each of the alternative secondary liability standards for which Petitioners and supporting amici argue would dramatically change the balance of power between the entertainment industry and the technology industry. It would do so despite the absence of a statutory basis in copyright law for this change and would disrupt settled expectations in the information technology industry.” (more…)

Maurice Solomon, a graduate student in information economics and policy at the University of Michigan School of Information, is spending the week working with the ACM and CRA Washington D.C. offices. The visit is part of the school’s Alternative Spring Break program, which seeks to help students gain experience and learn new skills though partnerships with information-focused organizations.

“There’s a fascinating amount of work for ACM and CRA to do,” said Maurice, referring to the array of issues in Washington in which technology plays a part. “I have been learning in depth about e-voting, telecom policy, protecting innovation, research funding, and the voices that the ACM and CRA contribute to these areas.” One of the most educational parts of the experience so far, attending a House Commerce Committee hearing on recent telecom mergers, “helped me see the broad intersection between the business and policy worlds,” said Maurice.

After completing his undergraduate degree in math-economics, Maurice spent a year teaching English in Japan before beginning his graduate education. After graduating, he plans to go into strategy consulting for information and technology focused firms.

CONTENTS

[1] Successful Policy Summit Focuses USACM’s Agenda
[2] USACM Joins Legal Scholars To Protect Innovation
[3] USACM Weighs in on High-Performance Computing Legislation
[4] ChoicePoint Privacy Breach Getting Congressional Attention
[5] Real ID Act Passes U.S. House of Representatives
[6] Congress Organizes (Mostly): IT Policy Implications
[7] Events to Watch In March
[8] About USACM

[An archive of all previous editions of Washington Update is available here.]
(more…)