“We must balance privacy and security.”
This now commonplace sentiment is greeted with chagrin by those who feel using the word “balance” implies one goal must be sacrificed for the other. The truth is we need to work equally hard and with the same level of commitment and vigilance to ensure that both our privacy rights and nation’s security are protected.
It is abundantly clear there are groups seeking to do us harm. Many feel that government law enforcement should be provided sufficient latitude to gather and mine as much information as is necessary to identify and target those individuals, even if that means relinquishing our rights to privacy in our conversations, whereabouts, transactions and associations. Although law enforcement and intelligence groups do need requisite tools to perform their difficult jobs, this must be done in a manner that does not weaken our privacy and civil liberties. Just like that favorite children’s book series that includes “If You Give a Moose a Muffin” and “If you Give a Mouse a Cookie” the persistent animal is never satisfied with just a muffin or a cookie, since they always wind up “needing” more than their first initial, simple request. In government parlance this is referred to as “scope creep” or the expanded scope of a mission beyond its original purpose. And we have seen this with the abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which recognizes the exigencies of certain situations and provides for an emergency warrantless wiretap provided a request for a search warrant is made within 24 hours (now 72). Recent events have demonstrated that the latitude provided in FISA may be unilaterally expanded even though a 24 hour grace period was provided.
The main issue in American foreign policy now is repairing America's image in the world. There would be no greater asset in that task than a leader like Obama, who by his very multicultural hybrid biography, renews the fundamental promise of America to the world as a society where every individual is considered worthy enough to get a chance in life.
We need a leader who will follow his conscience at the helm of a nation of citizens who are not afraid to vote theirs. There are those in this world who will hate us no matter what we do, but following the compass of our consciences, we will have behind us the moral and legal justifications for our actions -- actions that for the first time in too long we can support together as a nation. America can once again lead the way to hope and human dignity for all.
I've learned from her to keep talking with people even if they think they're your enemy. Barack was smart and brave to commit to this in a recent debate.
Most people’s initial reaction to the topic of technology policy can be described by the following policy debate scene in the movie Old School:
[Jeremy Piven] What is your position on the role of government in supporting innovation in the field of biotechnology?
[Will Ferrell] Recent research has shown the empirical evidence for globalization of corporate innovation is very limited. And as a corollary, the market for technologies is shrinking. As a world leader, it is important for America to provide systematic research grants for our scientists.
I believe there will always be a need for us to have a well-articulated innovation policy with emphasis on human resource development. Thank you....
[Will Ferrell] What happened? I blacked out.
Even the mighty persona of Will Ferrell does not change the reaction. Confusing. Jargon-filled. Applicable to only technologists. This is putting me to sleep.
In contrast, Barack Obama’s Technology and Innovation plan stands out for its simplicity and clarity of vision and purpose. All Americans, not just technologists, can appreciate the benefits of Obama’s comprehensive plan.
Technology has become an essential fabric of our lives and is no longer an isolated discipline that is pursued by technologists only. The Internet has become an essential utility that enables us to connect with family and friends as well as learn about almost any topic imaginable. Journalism, economics, and even art have been impacted and benefit from the power of technology.
Obama’s plan charts a clear vision of applying the power of technology to real problems such as health care and education. His vision of a national CTO shows his willingness to break down silos and increase the impact technology can have in all areas of government. The plan also shows a careful respect of the free market that has driven technology innovation balanced with the right level of government incentives and support.
Many of my friends in the technology and investment industry have commented to me that this is the first time they feel a candidate “gets it” with regard to technology. For us in the technology field, it is important to have a candidate that can have an intelligent viewpoint about technology issues and what do about them.
It is easy for many of us to forget that the Internet was started through a government (DARPA) grant. Or in the 1960s, John F. Kennedy charted a vision for the space program that established our leadership role in all fields of science and technology.
Imagine how much more we can do with a well thought out policy plan for technology that reminds us of the possibilities and not the impossibilities. And, by the way, does not put us to sleep, no offense to Will Ferrell.
Happy Holidays from Seattle,
-Kartik Raghavan
I want to talk a bit today about Barack's call, in his Technology and Innovation policy document, for reform of the patent system. Patent reform is something I care about a great deal, for a couple of reasons. First, a balanced and well-functioning patent system is vital for American innovation, techological leadership, and continued prosperity. Second -- and here is where I put on my academic hat (I'm a law professor at the Univ. of Virginia) -- it's long past time we re-focused on why we have intellectual property rules, and how those rules can best engage with our current (and almost certain future) environment of fast technological change.
So, a few words on both of my concerns. First, economics. The current patent rules produce too many low-quality patents, not least because the United States Patent and Trademark Office does not have the resources to deal adequately with the flood of patent applications. Low-quality patents -- i.e,., patents that should never have been granted, or, if granted, should have had their scope significantly cut back -- pose a significant competitive problem for the American economy. American innovators are threatened by "patent trolls" -- speculators who obtain and litigate often-dubious patents. And to make matters worse, in some cases the courts have issued rulings that allow patent plaintiffs to obtain injunctions and damages awards *much* greater than the actual harm caused by the patent infringement. The prospect of out-sized patent awards threatens to deter innovation, and to spur even more patent litigation.
This is why I'm very glad that Barack Obama supports patent reform. Reform bills are slowly working their way through Congress. The House has passed a bill; we are waiting now for the Senate to act. The reforms contained in the current bills are the right ones to fix the system. Particularly important is the provision that would build in an administrative review mechanism where the PTO can re-assess the validity and scope of granted patents. This process, which will be aided by information provided by those who would be affected by the patent under examination, would help raise the quality of granted patents and ensure that innovators are able to do their work free of patent trolls and junk patent claims. As Barack has recognized, it is important that this effort be completed and that we restore balance to the patent system.
Second, and finally, I hope and expect that Barack's support of patent reform will lead to a broader re-examination of our current intellectual property rules and how they work (or fail to work) in our current environment of fast technological change. Here, I'm talking not just about patent but also -- and perhaps especially -- about copyright. And I should also make clear that in what follows I am not in any way speaking for Barack. These are my ideas -- take them for what they are worth. I mention them, however, because Barack's support for patent reform is not simply a one-off. Barack's Technology and Innovation policy offers thoughtful and balanced ideas on controversies as diverse as media ownership, privacy, and open government. There is very little discussion of copyright rules in that document. Nonethess, I hope that what I'm saying here is informed by the document's spirit, if not its letter.
So, some thoughts. We are living in a time of incredible technological change. Just think of the music you'll be buying for your family this Christmas. Many of us will purchase that music in the form of a download -- perhaps from Apple's iTunes or one of its rival download services. Well, five years ago the market for music downloads was worth just about zero. Today, we spend almost a billion dollars per year on downloads -- and the dollar value of that market is growing by almost 75% per year. That's a bright spot for the music industry, but it's not the entire story, of course. According to the music industry's own statistics, the CD business is in free-fall, having contracted by more than 20% over the past five years. Some of the decline is probably due to widespread piracy of music over peer-to-peer networks like Gnutella and eDonkey. But most of the decline reflects a technological shift that gives consumers more of what they want (cheap download single tracks) and less of what they don't (the songs bundled on a relatively expensive CD that they'd rather not pay for).
The best outcome would be -- again -- balance. Consumers should get the benefits of the technological advances that lower the price and increase their choices in how they purchase and listen to music. And the music industry's legitimate interest in not having the market for its product ruined by stealing should be respected. But there are, of course, limits to what the law can and should do to stop infringement of copyrights. And unfortunately these limits have not always been respected. There is, for example, a proposal currently in Congress to expand criminal penalties for copyright infringement and introduce wide-ranging wiretap powers to detect infringement. With respect, these are terrible ideas. Copyright infringement is a wrong, but not one that should be dealt with through criminal sanctions except in the most egregious cases (for example, something like an organized copyright infringement conspiracy). So please chalk me up as opposed to "copyright prison". And the "copyright wiretaps" idea is just plain creepy -- given the current problem we face with a surveillance culture run amok, I hesitate to give the government wiretap power for the purpose of detecting copyright infringement. Why? Perhaps because under current law, I'd be willing to bet that everyone reading this has committed at least one copyright violation this week -- indeed, you've probably done quite a bit worse than that. And for the same reason, another proposal currently before Congress which would create a new offense of "attempted copyright infringement" is also a very bad idea. Under the current proposal, evidence of "attempted infringement" could be something as seemingly innocuous as having a computer and a bunch of blank CDs in the same room. Now how many of you would be guilty under that provision?
I hope what I've said here will provoke some of you to think about IP policy, and how it should change in the coming years. Perhaps the most important reason I support Barack is because I expect, based on his obvious intellect and deep commitment to fair debate and the public good, that an Obama Administration would engage us all in a more principled re-assessment of a range of policies -- IP among them -- that are vital to the future of a safe, prosperous and creative America.
All best for a wonderful holiday season. Yours, Chris Sprigman
Sunlight funded OMB Watch to build FedSpending.org (the first searchable database of all govt contracts and grants), for $325K. They built it. Then the Obama-Coburn bill was passed (with help from a cross-partisan coalition of bloggers, who smoked out the Senator who had put a secret hold on the bill) mandating that the OMB build its own official database, for $15 million. OMB Watch offered to help OMB get the job done...even though the watchdog group and the government agency are usually major adversaries. As the attached story in the Washington Post explains, after some hesitation, OMB's director decided to work with OMB Watch, and they licensed the software from OMBWatch for $600K. The new site, USASpending.gov, launched today, two weeks ahead of schedule.
The first step in creating our transparent and connected democracy went live this morning. Everyone needs to check out the new Google for Government site (www.usaspending.gov). This site is the result of Obama-Coburn legislation and provides a searchable database of all federal spending. You can search either contracts or federal assistance and can search by recipients, congressional districts, types of products or services provided, type of competition, and a whole bunch of other criteria. The site also plans to have a wiki- forum for public comment.
I spent some time surfing around on the site this morning and it’s full of terrific data and amazingly user-friendly. In fact, it was kind of shocking that nothing similar had been available until now. Were I a reporter, I’d be having a field day. In the long line of open government attempts, this one is sure to be a milestone in using the internet to make government more transparent.
To cite just a few things I found with one or two clicks: unsurprisingly, the top four recipients of government largesse are military contractors; there have been $138 billion worth of no-bid contracts under Bush; and various agencies within the California education system dominate the top-tier of the government assistance list. But surely others will find more surprising and specific details with a little more poking around (and if anyone does find real eye-openers, please post them here so we can offer better examples of what the site can reveal).
The bottom line is that the tech plan is more than paper, it’s happening. It’s a good example to show others that this campaign doesn’t just talk the talk, it walks the walk.
As a practicing lawyer in Washington, DC for 30 years, I have seen firsthand how far our government institutions fall short of the ideals of openness and responsiveness to the public will. Just finding out what our government agencies are doing is difficult, let alone participating effectively in government decisions. This is one of the reasons why affected businesses and other organizations hire Washington lawyers – to detect and decipher the workings of government.
But it shouldn’t be necessary to hire a shaman to speak with our government. The problem, as I see it, has two aspects: government officials who resist openness because they are more comfortable operating in the dark; and a failure by everyone so far to seize the potential of the Internet and technology to become the vital nervous system of democracy.
The first aspect of the problem is at its worst today, with a Bush Administration that is actively hostile to public scrutiny or public participation. From the White House’s refusal to disclose who advises the Vice President on energy policy, to the FCC’s selective release of information about its upcoming actions, we see a government that isn’t even trying to meet the public half way.
The second aspect is simply an opportunity not yet grasped: No administration of either party has yet taken advantage of the potential of technology to make democracy work.
Outside government, organizations such as the Sunlight Foundation (sunlightfoundation.com) are attacking these problems – prying information out of government and using technology to disperse it. But this shouldn’t be left for others to do despite the government – the government should be taking the lead.
Barack Obama offers a solution to both halves of the problem. As his technology statement and other writings make clear, he is fundamentally committed to making government accessible and responsive to all the citizenry, not just Washington insiders. And he understands the transformative power of technology to make that happen. By bringing into the government the technology savvy and innovative spirit that have made our private technology sector the envy of the world, he wants to give us a transparent and connected democracy that also will be the envy of the world.
It’s time.
On December 7, 2007 in cities and small towns across the country, Democrat, Republican and "Open" Caucus groups formed independently online and Caucused face-to-face on National Caucus Day. The first-ever national Presidential Caucus is now history and the results are in. Barack Obama wins over Democrat voters generating 40% of Democrat Caucus voter preferences. Obama was followed by a three-way tie for second, with John Edwards, Bill Richardson and "Undecided" each generating 20% of Democratic Caucus preferences.
The thing about Senator Obama’s technology plan is that it doesn’t just promise broad generalities – it offers specific commitments. The plan recognizes the vast potential of technology to change society for the better, and at the same time it recognizes the challenges of technology and works to mitigate those, as well. Obama sees the potential in technology and wants to use it to transform society.Obama doesn’t just promise to ‘address climate change.’ He commits to a $50 billion government funded venture capital fund that will invest in innovative renewable energy technology. This will have direct, measured impact – it will help transform the ideas that the American marketplace generates into commercially viable technology solutions, and it will drive our innovation ahead of the looming energy crisis, rather than leaving us playing catch-up.
... more under the fold ...
"I figure we really need a guy who knows right from wrong," Newmark told The Trail, "and who can remind the world that we're the good guys."
Our campaign had an amazing weekend of organizing young and active voters to stay connected with our movement...
Friday night, musician Stephan Jenkins (Third Eye Blind) called on the crowd at Barack's Generation Obama event in Chicago to take out their cell phones and stay connected with the campaign by "texting in HOPE to 62262."
But the big boost came from our events with Oprah Winfrey over the weekend when thousands of people joined our text messaging campaign. At each event we asked the crowds of thousands to stay closer connected with our movement to change America by taking out their cell phones and texting "HOPE to 62262". South Carolina went a step further and asked everyone to make a few calls to undecided voters, making Williams-Brice Stadium the largest phone bank in the country!
Watch Tim Russert on the Today Show discussing the importance of staying connected to everyone at the Oprah events:
Also Abbi Tatton discussed our mobile program on CNN's Situation Room:
MSNBC's First Read reported:
"The campaign attempted to organize that enthusiasm by asking the crowd to text their cell phone numbers to the campaign. Jeremy Bird and Anton Gunn, the campaign's field and political directors, took the stage to ask the crowd to text their phone numbers to Obama's campaign. They also broke a Guinness World Record by conducting the world's largest phone bank, 36,426 people in the audience called four names of South Carolinian voters listed on the back of their tickets and asked them to support Barack Obama."
And the Associated Press wrote:
"Jamal Simmons, co-founder of cellular phone marketing firm Cherry Tree Mobile Media, said the calls and the campaign's pitch for audience members to sign up for text messages were smart innovations for a political campaign. He said, "If they got half the people in that crowd to get out their phone and text message, they got 15,000 cell phone numbers that they can send texts to on Election Day telling them to vote, which is a pretty powerful tool."
If you have not yet joined our text messaging program, what are you waiting for? Simply text HOPE to 62262 and become even more connected with our growing movement for change!
Among the many welcome aspects of Obama's exciting Technology plan, its components relating to open government also warrant admiration.
Open government cannot be taken for granted. Merging new modes of communication with government decisionmaking, Obama's plan will restore government openness and transparency.
But that is not all. In addition to ensuring that government is informationally responsive, the Obama Technology plan also calls for government to be informationally proactive. Originally, open government meant simply "We'll tell you if you ask." This form of openness is embodied, for example, in the Freedom of Information Act, which requires government to provide certain requested information. But government openness can mean more. Agency websites that provide information about agency intentions go one step further--"We'll tell you before you ask." The Obama plan would extend this approach throughout government, making valuable information available without formal request.
Here is the really exciting part, though. The Obama Technology plan takes open government to the next level. By actively soliciting input from citizens, the Obama plan gives government decisionmakers the benefit of opinion, information, and expertise from outside of government. That, in turn, will enhance the quality of the decisions government makes. This vision of openness makes government a partner.
For example, the Technology plan calls for government decisions to reflect the "best available data." Of course. But the plan makes this realistic by employing technologies that would ensure government decisionmakers know what data are available, and which are best. Government is open not just because it discloses information about what it has already done, but because it solicits citizens' input about what it is doing.
What a refreshing vision.
This is a reposting of a blog posting from Novembr 14, 2007 from the Cairns Blog, setting out why the Obama Tech Plan is such an important statement about the vision of democracy.
George Bernard Shaw once wrote, “All professions are conspiracies against the laity,” and nowhere is this more the case than in a democracy where we organize government as the closed domain of governmental professionals.
And what’s the result? Because we assume that government alone possesses the expertise to make public-policy decisions, the way we “do politics” is broken.
I recently heard this summary of the core principles of the Obama Technology & Innovation Plan:
Open Government. Open Networks. Open Markets.
The plan is the most comprehensive and detailed tech & innovation plan put forward by any candidate. But also bold, and simple at its core. I liked the sharp summary and wanted to share it.
I was fortunate to chair the group that advised Senator Obama and the campaign on the tech & innovation plan - a large and hardworking group that generated terrific ideas, rooted in the great work that the Senator and his strong Senate staff have been doing in this area for quite some time.
The response to the plan has been great. One independent comment that stands out: "If even half of the proposals outlined here were to be implemented, it would fundamentally change the nature of our democracy for the better". That's why Barack Obama is running for President - fundamentally changing the country and the world for the better. A lot will have to happen on many fronts for that to occur, and Senator Obama has been addressing all the topics in compelling ways. He is a 21st century candidate who recognizes that technology will be a key part of the solution to better government, and a key part of the solution to so many of the specific issues that concern Americans: health care, energy, education, as well as job creation and economic growth.
Send copies of the plan to people you know, especially people interested in technology and innovation. Or better, send them to BarackObama.com where they can read the plan and also participate in the discussion on the site. The Senator wants the feedback - and (not a small thing) is using technology to generate the best thinking and best ideas to make the country a better place.
Craig Newmark is the founder and owner of Craigslist.org
Hey, we really need to renew our shared spirit of working together in the USA, and Barack's serious about it.Our country needs someone to remind us of what our values are, and then we can remind the whole world that the America they believe in is still around.
(I'm flattered that he mentioned craigslist, but that's not consequential; what matters is the renewal of our values.)
Cross posted on Huffington Post
Another must-read in the New York Times -- on Obama's recent visit to Google headquarters:
Among the seven visiting candidates, only Senator Obama used his Google visit to announce details of policy proposals related to technology. Until his visit, he and Senator Edwards were widely viewed among technology bloggers as the two candidates who had the strongest positions on Internet neutrality, expanded broadband access and other technology issues. With his Google visit, however, Senator Obama succeeded in drawing attention to his plans for using technology to make government more accessible and transparent with, for example, live Internet feeds of all executive branch department and agency meetings.
For more on Obama's innovation plan, check out the MyPolicy Technology Discussion HQ.
Barack Obama believes that open discussion and transparency are critical to formulating policies that reflect the values of the American people. Today, in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Senator Obama and several of his top foreign policy advisers are holding a forum with Granite State residents.
Panelists include:
We've made it live and you can watch now:
TechPresident, a site that tracks presidential candidates' uses of technology, praises Obama's innovation plan:
Barack Obama not only gets it, he's put his whole technology/innovation platform into one neat package. Very helpful! In most respects, Obama differs little from Edwards in terms of understanding the power of the internet to drive innovation and educational opportunity, and like Edwards he also strongly supports net neutrality. Where he goes further is in arguing that "technology offers the tools to create real change in America," by connecting citizens to each other and by opening up the federal government to change how business is done--including "giving Americans the chance to participate in government deliberations and decision-making in ways that were not possible only a few years ago." (He calls this creating "a transparent and connected democracy"--hard to argue with that goal.) He also states a clearer case for how new communications infrastructure can help fuel economic growth, create jobs, reduce health care costs and solve the energy crisis. That said, we wish he didn't tout his own campaign's use of technology as demonstrating how he will open up governance, as we know the Obama campaign has maintained strong control over how its supporters use its web tools. But by calling for the explicit use of blogs, wikis and social networking tools "to modernize internal, cross-agency, and public communication and information sharing to improve government decision-making" and direct public commenting on the White House website before legislation is signed, Obama is clearly signaling a commitment to a much more robust e-democracy than anyone else. When it comes to education and the digital divide, Obama's platform is surprisingly less ambitious in imagining technology's potential benefits (given how broadly he sees its value elsewhere); his main concern appears to be wiring schools. As for any kind of national tech guard, Obama is also silent, though he does call for creating a new position of government chief technology officer and calls for making sure first responders have interoperable systems. Close but no cigar. We give him an A-.
Click here for more on Barack's technology and innovation policy and check out the MyPolicy Technology Discussion blog to weigh in with your thoughts.
