jd's Journal: Word from an Oregon Senator on software radio

I received a letter in response to a request by myself to Senator Ron Wyden (Oregon) on the topic of software radios. I pointed out that Open Source is often more secure than closed source, that a ban on open source would be a-priori restraint of trade that would probably be detrimental to the deployment and usefulness of such devices, and that the FCC's position on the matter did not appear to be justified by the facts. I tried to avoid the whole freedom argument, on the grounds that politicians are generally not elected by intellectuals. Over-priced, crippled technology that would probably be made elsewhere... that's an argument politicians can hear better.

(No insult intended to Senator Wyden, he may very well be extremely smart, but since I don't know him, the most logical thing for me to do is to insinuate all the areas that could dent his popularity and fund-raising potential.)

His response is interesting. Firstly, he agreed that Open Source can be more secure. A fair enough position to take, given the level of closed-source IT industry in Oregon, and far more generous than I'd have expected for that same reason.

His second comment - that many in the software industry have made identical - or near-identical - objections was fascinating. Politicians are extremely adept at saying what you want to hear - they have to be, it's their only way to survive in their line of work - but to the extent that IT industry leaders have complained, the Senate is apparently taking notice. They would appear to be aware now of Open Source - for good or bad - and are adjusting their thinking accordingly.

He goes on to say that he is not satisfied that the FCC's claims that closed-source will make the software more secure are correct and that banning open-source may be counter-productive to the FCC's objectives. Again, that's good. Whether he believes it or not, I don't know, but there's clearly enough doubt in his mind as to the wisdom of the FCC's course that he's willing to be in writing in saying that he believes Open Source could make for a more secure product and that the FCC's actions could backfire.

The last part is the part that unnerves me slightly. He says that if legislation comes before the Senate, he will keep my views in mind. He did NOT say he would oppose legislation that would ban Open Source software radios, only that he would keep in mind that I - and others - oppose such a ban. Nor did he say that he would make any effort to bring forward any legislation requiring the FCC to re-examine the issue or explain themselves.

Why is that unnerving? Because although he expresses disquiet, he won't commit himself to any actual action over it. Maybe I'm being too hard on him, but it bothers me intensely that he acknowledges my concerns are widespread in the industry but promises nothing. Not even so much as to ask the FCC why they're being so shirty on the issue. The letter is good, I appreciate his taking the time to, well, ask his secretary to probably print out a standard form letter, but that's not going to achieve results. Why should the FCC care how many form letters have been printed? Well, unless they have shares in the company making the envelopes.

A response that shows some sympathy is better than no response at all, but only if it is accompanied by action. I hope it does. I hope my mail to him made some useful contribution to the debate. I also hope that someday I'll win the lottery. I am curious as to which has the greater odds of success.

good for you...

[zogger]

...on the attempt. I used to be a fairly regular writer of snail mails and then emails to various congress people on this or that subject, and take advantage of going to their offices in person. After ~years~ of such, I realized I had had zero success and dropped my efforts down accordingly. Not totally stopped, but cut way back. I am rather pessimistic of dealing with the government now at any level short of being a personal billionaire and influencing "in person", which isn't happening, so there ya go. Fo

Do some checking

[jdray]

Before slamming Wyden too much, or just writing him off as someone who doesn't take these things to heart or deal with them in earnest, check out what he's done in other areas of of technology and Open Source. He's actually quite a proponent of it, as well as that of Net Neutrality. IIRC, he pushed legislation to mandate open document formats for all government documents (not sure where it went). As an Oregonian, I feel very well represented by Sen. Wyden. I suggest Googling him and see what you come up

Wyden Was Against the Authorization of Force

[vague_ascetic]

You are of course, right to doubt any elected politican, and anyone these politicians appoint. Never trust a politician farther than you can swing a rope from the oak tree that grows in front of city hall.

At the same time, it is important to get a good accounting of politicians; to understand the differences, and no matter what is pitched, there are vast differences, some even worthy of note:

Senator Ron Wyden(D-Oregon), Dissent against the Authorization of the Use of Force in Iraq [liberatedtext.org], October 8, 2002