The 463: Inside Tech Policy

"Dumbest Tech Bill So Far This Year?"

The good Charlie Cooper of CNET asks this question today about a California bill that bans the forced implant of RFID chips on humans...

From my vantage point in the peanut gallery, it's oh so tempting to hold our elected officials up to ridicule. But truth be told, it's sometimes impossible to resist. And when it comes to that increasingly busy intersection between the worlds of politics and technology, it seems the hits just keep on coming.

So it is that California State Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) introduced a bill that would "prohibit any person from forcing any other person to undergo an implant in their body of a radio frequency identification device."

I kid thee not...

Well, Charlie, do you feel better or worse that the Simitian bill isn't exactly original? For example, let me introduce you to a sponsor of a similar bill: Wisconsin State Rep. Marlin Schneider. He enters the dumb contest with this added flair...

"Members of Congress better wake up to the fact that the biggest threat to our liberty isn't Al-Qaeda, but technology."

PFF's Tech Policy Agenda

   
The Progress & Freedom Foundation announced its 10-point tech policy plan for the 110th Congress on Friday.  The 10...

1 - Renew fundamental reforms of communications regulations.
2 - Leave network neutrality concerns to the market and antitrust.
3 - Leave content business models and fair use to the market.
4 - When addressing patents, take a first-principles approach to property and innovation.
5 - Enact meaningful reform of archaic media ownerships laws and regulations that hinder media marketplace experimentation.
6- Pursue greater First Amendment parity among modern media providers by leveling the playing field in the direction of greater freedom for all operators / platforms.
7 - Subject data security and privacy proposals to careful benefit-cost analysis, including full examination of consumer benefits from services and technologies affected by these proposals.
8 - Promote pro-competitive, non-regulatory internet governance.
9 - Avoid open-ended, intrusive data retention mandates.
10 - Promote more efficient taxation of telecom services and Internet sales.

The full study with further descriptions of the positions can be downloaded here.  After the jump are two of the full recommendations....

I've Got 99 Uses; But Tracking Cows Ain't One*

What does electronic car security, a new postage stamp, smart medicine cabinets, and argument free soccer balls have in common? All are enabled by RFID technology.

The RFID Lowdown lists these four examples and 47 others that may or may not see the light of day. Some are meant to scare and rile up the privacy advocates. Most are really cool examples of how a emerging technology can be used to solve problems big and small.

*(Apologies to Jay-Z (video link). The Danger Mouse Grey Album version is epic --audio).

Technology, the New Al-Qaeda

Read this quote like 67 times.  It never gets less jaw-droppingly amazing:

"Members of Congress better wake up to the fact that the biggest threat to our liberty isn't Al-Qaeda, but technology."

This bit of neo-luddite wisdom was dropped on us (in Smart Money) by Rep. Marlin Schneider, a Wisconsin Democrat, who recently sponsored a successful state bill to ban forced implants of RFID chips on people.  As the RFID Law Blog says:

"Thank god! There has been so much unauthorized surgical implantation going on in the United States, someone finally put their foot down regarding RFID chips."

Personally, we're just happy it's still okay to force Junior Mints into someone's body during an operation.   But, really, why did Wisconsin feel the urgency to pass this law when there's never ever been an incident of "forced-chipping"  in Wisconsin (let alone, anywhere)?  Could it be politics? (The answer after the jump)...

Urban Legend RFID Legislation

New Hampshire is debating RFID legislation that would put parameters on how the technology can be used says the Union Leader.  Most of the rules have to do with mandating labeling of products that utilize RFID technology (like a credit card, for example) and restrictions on the state using the chips to track individuals.

It all seems rather benign until you consider a few things.  First, the legislation is calling for "universally accepted symbols" to designate RFID usage.  Yet, it seemingly would take some time before a symbol is universally accepted and credit card issuers, for one, are eager to implement the technology to speed payments and provide safer transactions.  Would this mean that everyone but New Hampshire residents could use a card with a RFID chip on it before the universe coalesced on a symbol to put on packaging?

Secondly, beyond electronic payments, RFID is still a far ways away from moving from the pallet to the product level.  One wonders what the rush is.  Or where the fear is derived from.

Which brings us to our third point. 

RFID: Satan's Technology (and here we thought it was Grand Theft Auto)

Sometimes we're wrong (see:  "Missing:  All That Post-Grokster Legislation").  But, sometimes we're lucky enough to be right. Unfortunately, in this case, this isn't a good thing for the tech industry.  See "Is That a Microchip in Your Pants?".  Here we provide perspective and a short history of RFID and the technology's seemingly intractable collisions with privacy advocates.  After the very dumb use of RFID chips to track children at a Northern California school, we feared that if the industry didn't manage the political and perception processes well, bad things could happen.  They are.  As Tom Foremski notes at SiliconValleyWatcher today:  "The biggest danger to Silicon Valley is that it could become illegal to innovate here."

Indeed.  In what should be a wake-up slap, a normally reasonable California state senator from Palo Alto (yes, you read right) has introduced legislation that would place a moratorium on the use of RFID chips in numerous government applications.  Originally, the proposed law called for a ban, but the bill has been watered down a bit since it's original introduction (and after easily passing the state senate 29-7).  Still, many in the tech industry feel that the bill will impede innovation and wrongly punishes a technology instead of bad user behavior.

Remote Controlled Humans = Bad

As a follow-up to our mini-primer on RFID policy and perceptions, The 463 thought folks would be interested in an European Commision advisory group's ethical advisments on implanting RFID chips in humans.  From Silicon.com....

"The European Commission this week adopted an opinion on the ethical aspects of ICT implants in the human body, declaring they should only be given to those in need rather than those who wish to enhance their faculties."

Coming soon:  RFID testing at chess tournaments.

"The EC, however, believes that using implants as surveillance tools is acceptable, as long as government has legislated for it first."

To the great disapointment of parents everywhere....

"The use of ICT implants in order to obtain remote control over the will of people should be strictly prohibited."

On a serious note, it's only a matter of time before Congress begins to hold hearings on similar issues.

Is That a Microchip In Your Pants?...

The 463 will be closely watching the policy issues around the deployment of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology.   Here, we'll recap the technnology and touch upon some of the controversies that it's meeting on it's way to a wholesale roll-out....

Last week two groups of Washington policymakers both essentially said that, for now, the promise of RFID far exceeds any need for government regulation of the technology's applications.

Neither pronouncement made much news.  It's likely because most even in the tech industry are still trying to get their arms around what RFID really is now and what it could potentially be.  Plus, neither had inferences of wireless panties or kindergartners with chips in their head.

More on that later....  First a quick step back....

Stratton Speaks

VeriSign CEO, Stratton Sclavos dove deep with both San Francisco Chronicle and CNET editors recently in an outreach effort to underline how the company's intelligent infrastructure services bring together disparate elements like RFID, VOIP, Internet commerce, security and the .com and .net registries.  Today's Chronicle article is here and the CNET Q&A here.  In the Chronicle interview, Sclavos says this about ICANN...

"I think a strong ICANN, well run, would be a good thing. I think that if you can create self-regulation, that is always the best model, versus legislation or country-by-country mandates. But ICANN was created in a time when the Internet was booming, domain names were growing fivefold a year, there was just total chaos. And so the reasons for which it was created no longer exist.

"At the same time, they have been, in our opinion, interfering with our business, against what our contractual terms are, and so we're in a legal dispute with them to get some clarity around what we can and can't do."