From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:38:47 +0800
To: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington
In-Reply-To: <v03102803b0d98e7faf2a@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980107122231.11363I-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Tim May wrote:

> The only conference recently which as sounded interesting was the one on
> "anonymity" down near LA recently...I might have gone, but I don't recall
> hearing about it, or being invited. Until it was over, of course.
> 
> (I guess it was filled up with journalists, judging from the various
> articles which have come out of it. Mostly cheesy articles, Declan's
> excepted.)

I think I was the only full-time journalist invited to participate. There
were maybe four or so jlists covering it. From the web site:

Attendance at this conference will be by invitation only. About 35
individuals will represent a
variety of backgrounds and perspectives including the computing industry
(such as Internet service
providers, network administrators, and providers of "anonymizing"
services) the legal community,
professional societies, academic institutions, law enforcement agencies,
and other agencies of
government. 

> But as John G. and Declan and others have noted, these things can do real
> damage. By skimming the surface, they are really just platforms for
> position advocacy. Whether "conferences" on "ratings," or "Net.porn," or
> "anonymity," or whatever, they end up being fora for certain policy wonks
> to make their cases. And lazy staffers can then regurgitate the positions
> as proposed legislation. (Thus satisfying their quotas, and proving they
> are working hard.)

Lobbyists need to show they're doing something to justify the money they
grab from corporations (many of which could be doing something better with
this cash, like R&D). Hence they host conferences and attend others.

There are very, very few groups out there that say Washington should take
a "hands off" approach to the Internet. Oh, sure, high tech firms
(including Microsoft) will use it as a good PR line but wait 'til they get
a chance to pass a criminal copyright bill. Even the librarians and
scientists, generally good on issues like content and copyright, spend
much of their time trying to grab more federal dollars. Like the new
federal phone tax the librarians and teachers pushed for: something like
$10-20/year per phone line. 

Then of course there's the religious right and the law enforcement
lobbyists, all of which have their own pet projects and legislation.

There are few groups who are consistently opposed to the government
mucking around with the Internet. Cato Institute, Competitive Enterprise
Institute, and maybe American Enterprise Institute and Citizens for Sound
Economy and the Federalist Society.

Very, very few.

-Declan