Dear Potus 08
From CFPWiki
If the Computers, Freedom, and Privacy community wrote a letter to the next President of the United States about our priorities for technology policy, what would we say -- and how would we get him or her to read it?
There's only one way to find out.
At this year's conference dinner, we will launch a collaborative effort to write a short letter to the next President from the CFP '08 attendees. We'll get these initial results up on a wiki, and evolve and refine them over the follwing 36 hours. By Friday morning, if we've managed to converge on something plausible, we'll start circulating the current draft for signatures. At the end of the conference, we'll mail the current draft to the presidential campaigns and invite their response.
We'll also put it all up on the web - with a Creative Commons "by" (attribution) license - and invite others to use it for whatever purposes they want as we revise our initial draft, get broader involvement and discussion, and try to get our voice heard amidst the din of the campaigns. If it works out, our experiment could be an example for other grassroots efforts on other issues and in different countries. And if nobody cares? We will have at least tried to find a set of common concerns through a deliberative process that could complement other efforts. In any case, it'll be a good learning experience.
A lot of the details are still TBD. Your input is most welcomed. We're doing a couple of "beta tests" before the conference as well as kicking off some initial discussion of the theses for technology policy which could potentially serve as the principles underlying the letter. We'll keep this page updated, and post about it on the blog as well.
Tags
cfp08 dearpotus08
Table Tennis
HOW TO GET MORE ATTENTION ON TECHNOLOGY POLICY: - Use wikis - Interdisciplinary conferences/symposia - Make use of media contacts from CFP etc - Increased research grant funding for interdisciplinary technology policy and practice - Better leverage existing expertise on technology policy; bring more experts into the policy-making level (eg tapping expertise in university communities) TOPICS NEEDING MORE ATTENTION:
- ISP side: o Network data, privacy location data o Discretion calls â traffic shaping â ISPs shouldnât be deciding o Minimal structure â a better version of the phone companies â conveyance not application o In whose interest are ISPs streamlining? o Clarify ISP immunity for tortious conduct generally ie extend s. 230 CDA more broadly? - Network neutrality o Domestic homogeneous access and content o Censorship overseas e.g. European Parliament considers censorship to be a trade barrier - Digital divide o Using innovation to better educate; o Technology curriculum - International network neutrality - âLife, liberty and the pursuit of internetâ - Ascertain effectiveness of current limitations on privacy - Clarification of limited scope of trademarks online (eg search engine context, word of mouth âadvertisingâ etc) - Establishing a set of fundamental rights that could be applied to U.S., and ultimately international, information law and policy - Re-work/clarify cross border dealings with airline passenger data, particularly E.U. and U.S. agreement; need to work collaboratively on this kind of data - Policy on establishment of international database on DNA, biometric information for law enforcement, international security purposes (consider European model?) - Approach to policy making on information technology; less focus on stakeholder interests and more on empirical evidence in formulating policy decisions
TOPICS WITH POOR/INADEQUATE/MISGUIDED COVERAGE: - Repeal anti-circumvention/anti-trafficking provisions of DMCA - Get rid of ICANN - Greater emphasis on FTC enforcement of information law; consent decrees have no teeth - Trade impact of patents and standards (domestic and international) - More research grants re interdisciplinary technology policy
