Report On The Texas Censorware Bill

www.sorehands.com writes that yesterday, "in Texas, the Committee on Business and Industry heard testimony on HB1295. HB1295 is a bill which, if passed, would require PC sellers in Texas to include censorware on the machines they sell. Under this bill, if a "personal computer" incudes an operating system, the manufacturer would be required to provide fitering software. There are no exceptions for personal computers used for business, or for computers operating systems for which there is no censorware. This bill was prompted by SPAM to the author's, Garcia, AOL account popping up porn before being caught by the AOL parental controls. Garcia also said that downloading and installing the software over the net is too difficult for anyone over 30 years old to install. The committee seemed leary of the bill given that Texas B & C Code Sec 35.101 et seq requires that ISPs provide links to censorware." This lowers Texas on the list of "states to move to" when my lease runs out. Update: 03/21 06:10 PM by T : Jamie points to this earlier post at censorware.net as well.

Hmmm....

Maybe being a competent legislator is too difficult for anyone over 30 years old.

I have a better solution...

(First, it's not 'censorware', it's 'filterware'. Until everyone is required to RUN it (not just have it), it's still filtering and not censoring).

But instead of forcing OEMs to install this on computers, why not simply have the gov't subsidize free copies on CD Roms that come with the computer, making sure that the installation instructions are as simply as "follow on screen instructions"? Yes, if you assume that there's about 10 million computers in TX, that means that it would be $300-$500 million in software costs, but I betcha that you could easily persuade the filterware companies to take a bulk sum per year, say, $50-$100 million, for an unlimited 'state' licence.

I don't think there's a problem in trying to enable any parent to have a easy way to include filtering software on a family PC, and if you put that cost into the cost of a computer or for free, and include software with the computer, all the better. But I do agree you need to distiquish between corporate sales and personal or educational sales, and it should not be preinstalled unless the person requests for it to be.

Houston, We Have A Problem! Houston? Hello?

I can see the headlines now. As NASA purchases more sparcs, HPs, and Linux PCs, now preinstalled with Bloatware's latest TapeYourMouthShut Censorware(tm) product for their respective platforms, missions are disrupted, perahps even scrubbed, or worse, as the poorly written, closed source software memory leaks all over the system, bringing it to its (still operational, but just barely) knees. Calculations which once to microseconds now lag for tens of seconds, orbits and maneuvers are started too late or missed altogether, etc. etc. Until the computer handling communications signalling gets so out of sync that communications are lost, or rerouted to some other locale with less, shall we say, encumbered equipment (such as Russia or Edwards)

All so some idiot 30year plus legislature can go a few more years without bending a single brain cell to obtain basic computer literacy.

Re:Never happen in a million years

Ahh -- but this bill is "good for Dell". Why?

It's painfully easy for Dell, Compaq, etc. to negotiate OEM licenses with Mattel, et al., to bundle a censorware product on their PCs at an oh-so-cheap price. Meanwhile, all of the little PC vendors in places like Beltline in Carrollton and N. Central Expwy. in Richardson would have to pay substantially higher prices for the censorware, driving up the prices of their PCs, and making the mass-produced hardware more competetive.

Don't be surprised if the AOL story that Garcia cited is nothing more than a red herring, and he's just shilling for Compaq (or maybe Dell, but it is less likely).

MOO;IANAL.

Damn it, I'm old and didn't know it

I read the summary and kind of chuckled at how the old people were so out of the loop that they couldn't install censorware. Sadly, I didn't wake up to the fact that I'm turning 33 in a few days until I read your follow-up.

So I declare that the rep is both naive and fascist were before I only thought he was fascist.

--

Beyond Censorware

Longtime readers may be aware that I have little to no problems with censorware. I believe that people should be able to do what everythey want on the net so long as they don't interfer with anyone elses right to do the same, and that they do so on their own machine. That terminal in the public library isn't mine, so I don't get to make the rules about what software can or cannot be installed.

But ignore all of that. This Texas bill has nothing whatsoever to do with censorware. It has everything to do with some buttinski politician exploring the seemingly limitless avenues personal political power. The bill could be mandating the installation of Linux on PCs, the use of asphalt shingles on doghouses, or flow limiters in toilets, but it would be every bit as evil.

I can understand why Garcia is ticked off that some unsolicited porn popped up on his monitor. But what I don't understand is why the wrath is targeted at the innocent retailer and consumer rather than being targeted at the actual culprit. It's time to start filing criminal charges at the pornspammers instead of imprisoning their victims.

Re:If he had two brain cells to rub together...

Yes, on one hand he's saying, "Don't trust anyone over 30 to have a clue about technology." and on the other he's saying that, "While I don't have a clue about technology, I know how to fix it."

People might complain about Texas politicians being amateur, but this kind of thinking often happens at the national level too!

I would also be upset if something popped up porn at me without me being able to stop it, but we all know what a double-edged sword censorware is. Or more specifically, it's only got edge, and that only works on the user.

Re:So, how exactly does this affect alternative OS

> Yeah, censorware exists for Linux.
>
> # route add default reject

Hmm... Now that I think about it, something like Junkbuster and a non-null sblock.ini should probably qualify.

After all, it's something its users use to block content they deem offensive ;-)

If it ever looks like the bill will pass, all we have to do is point this out and supply a suitable blockfile. The DMA will spend a small fortune on lobbyists to kill it.

Pisses off the control freaks. Costs the DMA money. Sounds like win-win all around.

My Letter to My Representative

Rather than posting on /., I started with a letter to my representative, since I'm now a Texas resident. I objected to the bill on the following counts:

Provides no ability for consumers to "opt out" of the installation when buying a computer.

Provides no exemption for businesses

Filtering software has been shown to be highly inaccurate

Provides no provisions for non-Windows operating systems

The Bill's fiscal note attached estimated a financial impact of zero. If Dell is required to install a $50 censorware package that a business does not need, and other manufacturers like Compaq are not, by virtue of not being in Texas, that hurts Dell, and hurting Dell hurts Texas, especially in my area (I live in Round Rock, where Dell world hq is)

I urge all Texas residents to do the same, today.

Re:Network Cards

Well it does say all computers sold with an operating system. That, and I'd bet most people still connect by modem.

What I'm thinking is that if they want to legislate inclusion of censorware because its too complicated for people to possibly install, then they need to legislate the inclusion of other things. In fact, PC sellers should include everything the buyer might ever need on the computer because it would be too difficult to install.

And when I go to fill out my taxes, they should be done for me when I pick up the forms because that is too complicated.

As long as we can just pass laws and make solutions, if I buy a car (I bought a Saturn) then I should be provided with a car that would fill all my possible needs. Choosing the right one is too complicated for me.

Hmm. We could pass a law that all medicine should work, and be applied successfully.

Damn, this is easy.

If he had two brain cells to rub together...

"Garcia also said that downloading and installing the software over the net is too difficult for anyone over 30 years old to install."

Maybe Mr. Garcia should learn that just because he's an idiot, not everyone in his age-group is equally idiotic.

Or in other words, "I'm stupid, I've got power, I'm going to keep dangerous objects away from EVERYONE else, because I can."

Re:Wrong

Here's the kicker, though. The bill is predicated on the assumption that people are too clueless to download and install software themselves. By the same token, then, they ought to be too clueless to deactivate or remove software. The bill actually attempts to mandate censorware, not filterware, if you look at it through the eyeballs of those who drafted it.

Time for some cleverness

It seems to me that there are two arguments here. One is the common one about censorware being evil and the other is that there is no censorware available for some (i.e. Free Software) operating systems that people want to sell. I don't have any solutions to the first other than to try to stop the legislation from passing, but I do have an idea about the second. Well just install Junkbuster and call it censorware.

If you think about it, Junkbuster is capable of doing everything that people expect from their censorware. It can block a whole list of sites based either on domain names (like whitehouse.com) or regexs (like domains including the word sex). With a bit of work you could make it look just like any other piece of censorware. Of course the big difference is that you'd also include the traditional anti-ad blocklist and a set of instructions- maybe even a shell script- to switch from blocking pr0n to blocking ads. This would allow you to dodge the law while providing something that your customers actually want. It's also easy as hell to disable if you decide to do so.

Err, 30-year olds need protecting?

"installing the software over the net is too difficult for anyone over 30 years old to install"

Oh no! We better legislate to protect those innocent little 30 year olds minds before theyre corrupted!!!

This sounds like the most dumbly worded bill I've ever heard.

Re:If he had two brain cells to rub together...

Dunno why this was marked troll. Swordgeek here brings up a very good point. Just because the honorable(?) Garcia is too lazy to figure out how to use his computer doesn't mean anyone else is that lazy. However, the problem is that most folks out there are that lazy. I get the picture that a lot of parents hide behind the fact that computers are so new and so complicated that they can't cope. I think such people should wake up. I mean c'mon here, you're telling me that an adult in their mid thirties who's been filing taxes and maybe running a small business is less sophisticated and literate than a child, even a teenager? I don't buy it. Granted, I'm coming from the perspective of someone who learned to program on an Apple II, but let's face it any adult that's not mentally impaired should be able to sit down with a manual and a tech support phone call and install filtering software. That is if they want it. What this takes is time and effort. So does sitting down with your kid and having a talk about what's out there both in the online world and the real world. That's what's really lacking in this disconnected suburban society.

My roomate is very conservative and I'm very liberal as some of my posts might indicate, but we both agree on one thing. And, that's the danger of this trend towards legislating risk and responsiblity away. He cites the increasing trend towards gun control, and I point to things like this. It all boils down to the same thing: Suburbanites want protected spaces cut off from reality and the possiblity that life has risk. No amount of legislation can ever keep the darker side of life from intruding. If you want to protect kids from from this darker side, you have to prepare them to confront it. You're going to have to take the time and make the effort to transmit the values you believe in to your kid. You're going to have to train your kid to think for themselves. But, of course, that's the problem. It's an effort and requires you take responsiblity. Of course a politican can't say that and expect to get relected in this risk averse society. A politican has to say don't worry, we'll make a law to cover that. Don't worry all it costs is a little bit of freedom. You won't miss it. And, for most people these days that's true. Most folks like their gilded cages.

What are you Linux geeks worried about?

Linux is one of the few systems that actually CAN comply with this law:

Just include a script somewhere on the system:

ipchains -P input DENY

This is just about the ONLY way to comply with a law that REQUIRES computes being able to CENSOR INDECENT material.
---

Yet Another Reason

To purchase a computer without an operating System.

I'm over 30 but I can download and install Debian.

Censorware must be really complex.

Re:The Tax?!?!

Read the bill that the article links to. The bill doesn't just apply to $2000 machines, but to ``each personal computer sold.''

I've bought a number of $50 machine in my life; three of them (a couple P120s and a 486) are in critical positions in my home network, and have been for more months than I can count. Net Nanny [netnanny.com] retails for $39.95, not $2.

Why should the price for such computers double for me, an unmarried bachelor of legal age with no kids? Why should I pay for software which I personally not only would never use, but find odious (considering that it's my personal opinion that censorware is one of the worst ways to ``protect'' your children and, yes, you're welcome to have a differing opinion)?

Why should, say, Motorola, which has a very large presence in the Texas state capial, pay for censorware with every computer they buy when their corporate firewall already does such filtering? (I know this from teaching Internet classes for Motorola to Motorolans.)

But wait, there's more! ``Software provided in compliance with Subsection (a) must be compatible with any operating system that is provided by the seller to the purchaser of the personal computer at the time of purchase.'' I'm not aware of any censorware available for Linux, Solaris, BeOS, *BSD, AIX, IRIX, etc. A nice little byproduct of the bill will be to make illegal the sales of computers with those operating systems.

But wait, there's even still more! ``If an operating system is not provided by the seller of the personal computer, the software required under Subsection (a) must be compatible with at least one operating system that may be installed to operate on the computer.'' I can't even buy a Mac SE/30 without an operating system because I'll be installing NetBSD on it, unless there's censorware that'll run on MacOS 7.2

The bill has no provision for computers outside the mainstream. None whatsoever.

This is bad legislation. Frankly, Texas needs to be putting its resources into other areas (perhaps cleaning up after W's environmental mess) than keeping kids from seeing bad pictures.

b&

um, interstate commerce?

How does Texas have authority over computers sold to Texans by out-of-state PC makers? Of course CPQ and DELL are Texas makers, but everyone's favorite PC maker, [valinux.com] based in California, won't be affected as it's engaged in interstate commerce, clearly the authority of the US Congress.

RTFB

SOFTWARE TO BE INCLUDED WITH SALE OF PERSONAL COMPUTER. (a) A person in the business of selling personal computers shall provide with each personal computer sold by that person software that enables the purchaser of the personal computer to automatically block or screen indecent material on the Internet. (b) Software provided in compliance with Subsection (a) must be compatible with any operating system that is provided by the seller to the purchaser of the personal computer at the time of purchase.

If an operating system is not provided by the seller of the personal computer, the software required under Subsection (a) must be compatible with at least one operating system that may be installed to operate on the computer.

(emphasis added)

So where did the "every personal computer sold with an OS" come from? This reads to me like "every personal computer".

A new level of suck

This is also another strike against the possible inclusion of Linux preloads on machines, because last I knew there is no censoring software for Linux. Also, aren't Dell and Compaq, two of the biggest PC distributers around, both based in Texas? Since both are "PC Sellers", esp. Dell, who sells direct, won't that affect prices (system+Windows+Censorware) all around the country?

Re:Huh?

This lowers Texas on the list of "states to move to" when my lease runs out.

What do you mean? The bill hasn't passed.

What does he mean ``lowers Texas on the list of "states to move to?"''

WTF was Texas doing on such a list in the first place?

Everything's bigger in Texas - the hair, the drawl, the delusion that Texas isn't a state full of pig-ignorant rednecks with unjustified superiority complexes.

-Craig (formerly of Schulenburg, TX)
--

Being 31 sucks.

I can confirm the senators assertion. I turned 31 on the 10th and ever since I have been unable to operate a computer properly, nor am I able to log onto the internet without the help of the 28y.o. next door.
Some thing must be done in the next 3 years to fix this problem or I will be unable to use a computer at all!
Even after the kind hearted youngen' next door help me get on the net I still had problems.
I tried patching my FreeBSD box and all it kept saying was "Stop, Dave. I can feel my mind going Dave. Stop."
Something needs to be done about the sudden loss of computer knowledge at age 31! How will I remain employed when my boss figures out I have forgotten all my Sysadmin knowledge?! Oh wait, he is over thirty as well...

Re:Network Cards

From working at an ISP and dealing with the public, I can tell you that there's a lot of willful ignorance about the Internet out there. I say willful because these people don't know much and don't want to know much. They'll ask you questions like, "Why can't I send or receive a 20 meg file via e-mail?" When you attempt to explain that e-mail was never designed for such things and that they ought to be using something like WhaleMail or FTP (God forbid they should even consider FTP) to do these things, they don't want to hear it. I've been told more than once, "Well, I'll just find an ISP that will let me do it." And that's just one example. I really do think that people like this (Rep. Garcia included) think that computers and the Internet are somehow magical, in that it's utterly impossible for the average human being to understand them, so they don't even make the effort to try. Since they personally do not understrand how to accomplish certain tasks such as downloading and installing software, they just assume that no one else can, so it therefore should be done for them. And don't overlook the religious right in all this. Although conservatives like to publicly justify their actions by saying their goal is to protect children, I've always believed this is just a smokescreen. I think their real aim is to do away with whatever they don't want to see or hear, and the "protect our children" line is just a way to make their activities more palatable to the general public. At any rate, a bill such as this would be a way to score some political points with them. Rep. Garcia wouldn't even have to say anything. The people who want everything censored will understand his actions without a word being spoken.

Re:Network Cards

you know, every single day, i understand better why General William T. Sherman said, "If I owned both Texas and Hell, I'd sell Texas and live in Hell."