FC: USACM letter to Sen. Hollings criticizing draft SSSCA bill

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

[I've attached the letter below. ACM's website may be redesigned someday, 
but Politech archives should, I hope, be permanent. --DBM]

Politech archive on the SSSCA:
http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=sssca

*********

Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 11:09:44 -0700
From: Barbara Simons <simons () acm org>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Subject: a USACM letter on some of the problems with the SSSCA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-UIDL: ea7246743d23b0dfb4f0616b7e35345b

Hi, Declan.  USACM (the US public policy committee of
ACM) recently sent a letter to Sen. Hollings expressing
our great concern with the provisions of Hollings' proposed
Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA).
The letter is posted at
http://www.acm.org/usacm/SSSCA-letter.html

We are hoping that other groups that share our concerns
about the SSSCA will also write to Hollings and other
policy makers as soon as possible.

Regards,
Barbara

*********

September 26, 2001
The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings
Chairman
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
SR-254 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C.  20510
Dear Chairman Hollings:
We recently learned that you intend to introduce legislation to require
computer and electronics manufacturers to include digital watermark technology
or other copyright-protection technologies in the production of certain
products and multi-use devices.  As the Co-Chairs of the U.S. Public
Policy Committee of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), we are
writing to express our deep concern regarding the potential legislative
proposal known as the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act
(SSSCA).
As Congress considers legislation with respect to the use of copyrighted
works on the Internet and in other digital and electronic contexts, we
urge you to recognize that there are many legitimate uses of technology
that would be impaired by additional copyright-protection measures.
Enacting additional copyright-protections beyond those already provided
by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is unwarranted.  Already,
we have seen an unintended chilling effect on computer security research
by the
DMCA. Any law along the lines of the SSSCA might well have more far-reaching
and damaging effects, particularly as our nation attempts to enhance the
security of our infrastructure and prevent acts of terrorism.
We would ask that you carefully consider the issues of cost, liability,
and government interference in technology standards-setting that would
be imposed by this legislation. We can think of many objections to the
legislation, based on our reading of the draft bill.
Here is a small sampling:
Colleges, universities and trade schools throughout the U.S. would no longer
be able to teach advanced computer science and computer engineering.
The acts of writing basic operating system software or assembling simple 
computer
systems in classes or as assignments would be against the proposed law.
Research in computer security and protection would be further curtailed,as
any such research would be required to be done on (and not interfere with) 
whatever technology is imposed by this law.  However, malicious actors
do not need to be so concerned. This has significant national security
implications.
Researchers and hobbyists seeking new uses for innovative technology might
well find their experimentation and prototypes to be criminal under this
law.
Devices as disparate as electronic cameras, wrist watches, electric pianos,
televisions, ATM machines, cell phones, home security systems, and medical 
equipment (among many examples) all process and display information 
electronically.
Under the proposed legislation, all would be required to support anti-copying
protocols.  In most such cases, this is absurd and will raise costs
unnecessarily. Inclusion of anti-copying technology in general purpose 
equipment -- including real-time computing devices used in traffic control,
air flight control, medical equipment, and manufacturing -- adds to their
complexity and potential for failure. Unexpected interactions with other
code, and accidental activation of protection protocols cannot be ruled
out in every case, and in many venues the potential for damage is extreme.
Photocopy machines, telephones and VCRs are now digital in form and can
copy information. Forcing adoption of anti-copying protocols on those 
machines will change accepted modes of use, at best, and may render them 
unusable
for their intended purposes.
Other countries will not have similar requirements in their laws and may
actively fear the imposition of anti-copy technologies; this will put U.S.
products at a competitive disadvantage with other products manufactured
elsewhere in the world. At a time when electronics manufacturers in other
countries are seeking an advantage over U.S. firms, this could be catastrophic
for the U.S. electronics industry.  In addition, the draft version
of SSSCA would have significant negative impacts on foreign technology
imports, such as the linux operating system, in direct violation of our
obligations as a participating member of the World Trade Organization.
As a publisher of electronic media, ACM is acutely aware of the
problems  with copyright protection in the modern world. However,
as technologists, we also believe that the solution is not to be found
in constraints and prohibitions on the technology. Rather, there needs
to be more efforts made in enforcement of current laws, in education of
consumers, and in deriving new models for e-commerce.  Historically,
the entertainment and publishing industries have claimed potential ruin 
from new technologies. However, those new technologies (such as videotape)
have actually served to increase the consumer demand and income for those
industries once the technologies were embraced.
In our society, we have achieved technological excellence, research
leadership, and educational preeminence in the world through the free exchange
of information and the freedom to innovate. Copyright was intended to support
those goals, not restrict them for entertainment companies. The explicit
embodiment of "fair use" provisions in the law has contributed to our many
successes. Any further legislative action -- such as the SSSCA -- which
focuses on constraining or outlawing technology instead of penalizing
behavior can only serve to weaken our educational systems, impede our
technological dominance, and interfere with our electronic security.
Comprised of computing professionals from academia, industry, and government,
the U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing Machinery
is pleased to offer our technical expertise to assist policy makers in
the development of computing and information technology policy. We would
appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation Committee on technology policy matters, including
proposals to require manufactures to include copyright-protection technologies
in products and multi-use devices.  Please contact Jeff Grove, Director
of the ACM Public Policy Office at (202) 659-9711, if you have any 
questions or if we can be
of assistance to your efforts.
Sincerely,
Barbara Simons, Ph.D.
Eugene H. Spafford, Ph.D.
Co-Chairs
U.S. ACM Public Policy Committee (USACM)
Association for Computing Machinery




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------