legislation
Latest
Google's self-driving cars will return to roots, tour California
Thanks to a new law passed in California, Google's driverless cars might soon be stuck in its traffic with all the other hapless commuters. Although they won't hit the highway yet, like they can in Nevada, the bipartisan bill will allow bureaucrats to craft safety and performance standards -- letting the robotic rigs roll (with licensed minders) in the near future. Joining Hawaii, Florida, Arizona and Oklahoma with similar legislation, the state hopes to reduce carnage on the roads caused by human error, and is backed by Google, the California Highway Patrol and various civic, auto and tech clubs. Of course, given that it was birthed in Google's Mountain View X lab, it's only natural that the autonomous EV should be allowed to roam free on its home turf.
House passes bill that would call for a single website tracking federal spending
The last time a proposed law captured our attention it was so widely loathed it was never even put to a vote, but today we bring you the kind of no-brainer legislation that seems to have strong support on both sides of the aisle. The US House of Representatives has passed the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA), a bill that calls for the creation of an independent board to log all federal spending on a single, centralized website. What's more, these expenses need to be recorded with identifiers and markup languages that make them more easily searchable. As Computerworld notes, the vote happens to come on the heels of a recent dust-up involving the US General Services Administration spending $823,000 on a conference in Vegas -- precisely the sort of excess this proposed website would be designed to expose. The next step, of course, is for the bill to win Senate approval, though for now it seems the legislation has garnered strong bi-partisan support: in a rare showing, all of the lawmakers who discussed the DATA Act on the House floor argued in favor of it.
Senate black box bill could see 2015 car models ship with data recorders
Black boxes aren't just for airplanes anymore, it seems. Though car companies have been installing the devices at their discretion since the early aughts, a new bill, ominously entitled Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century, has just passed Senate approval containing a provision that would mandate the inclusion of these Event Data Recorders in all automobiles produced from 2015 and on. Privacy fans may already be reaching for those protesting pitchforks, but keep in mind this legislation still needs to pass the House of Representatives on its way to becoming law. And given its other, more controversial elements (i.e. revoking passports for unpaid back taxes), it could still head back to the recycle bin. If it does pass Congressional muster, you'll still have ownership of any collected data, so long as the court doesn't require you to hand it over. Regardless of the outcome, we wouldn't breathe a sigh of relief just yet -- your car might be snooping on you as we speak. Just check your owner's manual.
European Commission outlines plans for Internet of Things regulation
The Internet of Things is on the rise, and when things get big, they tend to get regulated. The European Commission has spotted this trend, and has decided to get its rubber stamp ready, in a bid to protect individual rights from all the data that it collects, as well as "unleash the potential economic and societal benefits." While this may seem like bureaucratic party-pooping, the Commission points out that much of the information carried includes personal location, preferences and behavioral patterns. There will be an initial consultation to determine the required privacy and security of an IoT infrastructure which will then be fed into the Commission's recommendation -- expected to be presented in summer 2013. The good news is that there's a survey open to citizens and businesses to have their say on how on how the regulation should be administered. Check the more coverage link below to make your opinions heard.
Politicians propose cigarette warning labels for games
A bipartisan bill has been introduced that would, if passed, require cigarette-esque warning labels on video games. Authored by house reps Frank Wolf (R-VA) and Joe Baca (D-CA), the Violence in Video Games Labeling Act (H.R. 4204) would require all games rated "E" or higher, regardless of actual content, to bare a label that reads "WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior."This isn't the first time Wolf and Baca have tried to introduce such legislation; "The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2009" was essentially the same bill, although it only applied to games rated "T" and up. Its proposed warning label also made mention of "other violent media," which is absent from the dynamic duo's latest draft."Representative Baca's facially unconstitutional bill -- which has been introduced to no avail in each of six successive Congressional sessions, beginning in 2002 -- needlessly concerns parents with flawed research and junk science," says ESA representative Rich Taylor in a statement to Gamasutra.Taylor goes on to say that the supporting evidence used by Baca in the past has been "exhaustively reviewed" by "numerous medical experts, research authorities, and courts across the country, including the United States Supreme Court," which collectively found the data "lacking and unpersuasive."Baca's resolve, however, refuses to waiver. "The video game industry has a responsibility to parents, families and to consumers to inform them of the potentially damaging content that is often found in their products," Baca told The Hill. "They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility."When asked to comment, a fictional ESRB representative said "What am I, chopped liver?"
Nevada is getting serious about driverless cars
We were admittedly cynical last summer, when Nevada's state legislature passed a law regulating the safety of driverless cars. But maybe we shouldn't have been, because it looks like they're actually serious about it. The state has now begun fleshing out its campaign with new regulations for testing these robocars, which, of course, are still very much in their infancy. According to the Associated Press, drivers looking to test a driverless vehicle will have to first purchase a bond worth between $1 million and $3 million, depending on the specifics of their project. The data from each test, moreover, will have to be shared with state officials, and all automated vehicles must have some sort of black box-like device to securely store this information, in the event of a crash. Most interesting, however, is how humans fit into all of this. Under the state's regulations, a passenger is still considered an "operator" of the vehicle, even if he or she isn't driving. They'll be exempt from Nevada's ban on driving while texting, but they won't be able to rely on their robocar as a designated driver -- which is fine, because it's not like anyone drinks in Vegas anyway.
Australian government finally introduces R18+ bill, to go into effect next year
Australia's game rating woes are almost over. After years of debate and legal discussion about an R18+ rating for video games there (that would allow for the equivalent of the ESRB's M-rated games to be released without, you know, being illegal), the government has finally agreed to the new rating, aiming to enact it as early as next year. A bill setting up the extra rating was introduced to the Federal Parliament this week, and is expected to pass easily through the House and Senate.The bill would go into effect sooner, but the Federal Minister for Home Affairs says the government needs time to finish all of the paperwork on the new regulation, and to allow each state and territory to draft its own laws enforcing the rating. The bill wouldn't mandate a nationwide rating, but simply allow each territory to create its own.But that shouldn't be an issue, according to those in the know. Apparently, there's plenty of public support already. There were almost 60,000 submissions from the public responding to a discussion paper from 2010, and 98% of those were strongly in support of games rated R18+. As soon as the laws go into effect, retailers will be free to sell games as needed to anyone old enough to buy them.
Apple features 'communication to protect consumers' in Italy
Apple has apparently complied with a recent ruling by the Italian government that the company did not do enough, when selling its extended one-year warranties in stores, to let customers know that its products already came with a two-year warranty, as per consumer laws there. The company has posted an official message on its website in Italy, designated a "Communication to Protect Customers," that outlines exactly what rights customers have to that two-year warranty, and that the Apple Store pushed its paid warranty onto customers anyway. It's unknown, however, whether Apple will pay the around $1.2 million fine that Italian authorities have levied against the company for this behavior. This notice could be Apple trying to get out of paying the actual money. So far there's no indication that fines have been paid, or even that the company has changed its tactics in Italian stores. We'll have to see what actions the government takes after this. Of course, if the government does pursue fines against Apple, $1.2 million is about as "drop in the bucket" as it gets for a company with $98 billion in the bank. If Italian authorities do pursue this further, it might be easier for Apple to just write a check than worry about it for too long.
Hawaii's online tracking law is all but dead, lead sponsor confirms
The Hawaii state legislature has apparently pulled an about face on a proposed internet tracking bill, amid swelling concerns from civil libertarians and internet service providers alike. First introduced last week, the controversial measure calls for all ISPs to track and record a user's online activity and identity within individual digital dossiers. The law's supporters trumpeted it as a vital step in protecting "victims of crime," but its momentum has all but come to a halt, now that its lead champion has proclaimed its death. In a recent interview with CNET, Democratic Representative John Mizuno (pictured left) confirmed that his bill has been shelved, attributing the decision to the avalanche of critical feedback he's received (see the coverage links, below). "It's generated a lot of national attention," Mizuno explained. "I've taken into consideration the thousands of e-mails (which were often) colorful and passionate, which is absolutely fine... This bill just isn't ready. It needs a lot of work." Unfortunately, this doesn't mean spell an outright death for the law, as Mizuno still believes that keeping a record of browsing history could help authorities hunt down pedophiles and other evil doers. "I think both would be very strong pieces of evidence if there's going to be a criminal proceeding," he argued. Despite our own fundamental misgivings with Mizuno's approach, it's still encouraging to see politicians respond to public outcry so swiftly and, as with the SOPA debacle, appropriately.
Hawaii's proposed online tracking law comes under fire from ISPs, civil libertarians
There may be some trouble brewing in paradise, thanks to a seemingly draconian law currently under consideration in Hawaii's state legislature. If passed, H.B. 2288 would require all ISPs within the state to track and store information on their customers, including details on every website they visit, as well as their own names and addresses. The measure, introduced on Friday, also calls for this information to be recorded on each customer's digital file and stored for a full two years. Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the bill includes virtually no restrictions on how ISPs can use (read: "sell") this information, nor does it specify whether law enforcement authorities would need a court order to obtain a user's dossier from an ISP. And, because it applies to any firm that "provides access to the Internet," the law could conceivably be expanded to include not just service providers, but internet cafes, hotels or other businesses. Democratic Representative John Mizuno is the lead sponsor of the bill, though his support already seems to be waning. Not long after H.B. 2288 was introduced, Republican Representative Kymberly Pine told CNET that she would be withdrawing her support for it, adding that her intent was not to track Hawaiian web surfing, but to simply protect "victims of crime." "We do not want to know where everyone goes on the Internet," Pine explained. "That's not our interest. We just want the ability for law enforcement to be able to capture the activities of crime." Pine went on to acknowledge that the proposal has come under fire from many civil libertarians and internet companies within the state, and that the measure will likely be revised. In retrospect, she said, the concept of storing personal information "was a little broad," and Hawaii's lawmakers "deserved" the criticism they received during today's hearing.
Firefall beta shutting down to protest SOPA
Gamers opposed to the controversial new SOPA legislation are somewhat limited in terms of voicing their displeasure. Game companies have a bit more visibility, and Red 5 Studios is making the most of it. On January 18th, the company will temporarily shut down the beta for its highly anticipated Firefall MMO shooter as a form of protest. The lights will remain off for 24 hours, and Red 5 CEO Mark Kern has some strong words for the bill and those who support it. "We are extremely disappointed in this misguided legislation. We are also ashamed of the ESA for supporting a bill which is clearly not in the best interests of gamers or the game industry," he told ShackNews. Kern went on to say that Red 5 has canceled its plans to attend this year's E3 "unless ESA reverses their stance."
FCC tells advertisers to CALM down, lowers the volume on commercial breaks
Pretty soon, you won't have to scramble to lower the volume during noisy commercial breaks -- that's if you even watch live TV. After making its way through Capitol Hill, the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act (or CALM) -- which aims to keep the sounds coming out of your flat panel even-keeled -- has just been adopted in a ruling by the FCC. Starting next December, ads and promos will have to remain in-step with the audio levels of scheduled programming. While the affected parties have a full year to get their acts together, the main burden of enforcement lies with broadcasters and MVPDs like Comcast and Verizon FiOS. So, come next holiday season, you'll be able to tune in and tune out without being blown away.
Google, Facebook, Twitter and others speak out against the Stop Online Piracy Act
Earlier today, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (or SOPA) which, depending on who you ask, is either a means to stop piracy and copyright infringement on so-called "rogue" websites, or the most serious threat of internet censorship that we've seen in some time. In the latter camp are some of the biggest internet companies around, including Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, LinkedIn, Mozilla, Zynga and AOL (full disclosure: Engadget's parent company), who today made their stance clear by taking out a full-page ad in The New York Times. The ad itself is a letter sent by the nine companies to Congress, which states that while they support the stated goals of the bill and the related Protect IP Act, they believe that, as written, the bills "would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action, and technology mandates that would require monitoring of web sites." The companies further went on to say that they believe the measures also "pose a serious risk to our industry's continued track record of innovation and job-creation, as well as to our Nation's cybersecurity." While they didn't all sign onto the letter, those companies also also joined by a host of others who have spoken out against the legislation, including Foursquare and Tumblr. The sole witness against the proposed measures at today's hearing, however, was Google's copyright policy counsel, Katherine Oyama -- you can find her testimony on Google's Public Policy Blog linked below.
Senate to vote on net neutrality repeal today, Obama counters with a veto threat (update: 52-46 vote in favor of net neutrality)
The US Senate is slated to vote on a repeal of the FCC's controversial net neutrality regulations today, just a few days before they're scheduled to go into effect. Today's vote, like most these days, is expected to be divided along party lines, with most Democrats standing in favor of the rules, and Republicans calling for them to be overturned. Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, who sponsored the resolution, claims that the FCC's regulations would obstruct innovation and investment by jeopardizing the openness upon which the web has thrived, thus far. "The internet and technology have produced more jobs in this country than just about any other sector," Hutchinson argued. "It has been the cradle of innovation, it does not have a problem, and it does not need fixing." Senate Republicans aren't the only ones taking issue with the rules, either. Both Verizon and MetroPCS have already publicly aired their grievances, with the former filing a formal appeal in late September. But Senate Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller believes the GOP-led opposition won't be strong enough to overcome his Democratic majority. "There's still 53 of us, and if we stay together we'll win," Rockefeller said. "I think we're going to prevail." Even if they don't, they'll still have the backing of the White House, which has already threatened to veto the resolution, should it survive past the Senate floor. "It would be ill-advised to threaten the very foundations of innovation in the Internet economy and the democratic spirit that has made the Internet a force for social progress around the world," the White House said in a statement, adding that the FCC's rules provide an "effective but flexible" means of preserving the web's intrinsically wild, wild west nature. Rockefeller, however, certainly isn't banking on a presidential veto to bail his party out. "You can take the cheap way out and just say, 'What if we fail, then Obama will veto it,'" he explained. "But that speaks so badly of us." All told, it's shaping up to be another net neutrality showdown on the Hill, but we'll keep you updated on the latest developments. Update: It wasn't an overwhelming victory, but the Senate today rejected the attempt to repeal the FCC's net neutrality rules in a 52 to 46 vote that fell largely along party lines.
Verizon appeals net neutrality rules, let the legal wrangling begin
We told you it was only a matter of time and, honestly, it took a bit longer than expected. Verizon has officially filed an appeal to the FCC's net neutrality rules, which are set to take effect on Novemeber 20th. It wasn't until the regulations were published in the Federal Register on September 23rd that they became fair game for legal challenges -- a technicality that resulted in Verizon's previous attempt to block the rules being tossed out by the US Court of Appeals in April. While Verizon senior vice president and deputy general counsel, Michael E. Glover, assures netizens that the company is "fully committed to an open Internet," it none-the-less takes issue with the FCC's attempt to institute new "broad" and "sweeping" regulations on the telecommunications industry. We're sure this is only the first of several cases that will be brought before the courts challenging the commission's authority. Stayed tuned to see if and when MetroPCS re-enters the fray, and to find out the ultimate fate of net neutrality here in the US. Check out the brief statement from Verizon after the break.
America may join the net neutrality parade on November 20th, if the courts let it
Well America, on November 20th you too will finally have net neutrality regulations all your own... provided the anticipated pile of lawsuits don't derail the process. The FCC will publish its "open internet rules" in the Federal Register tomorrow, making the regulations official. These are the same fairly modest proposals that were passed nearly a year ago over Republican opposition and, on that fateful day in November, they're scheduled to take effect. The rules have already faced challenges from Congress, Verizon and MetroPCS, but those suits were dismissed since the regulations technically didn't exist. After tomorrow though, any and all legal challenges will be fair game. Since the FCC is relying on its ancillary powers instead of reclassifying broadband as a Tier II service (similar to telephone landlines), those challenges could actually meet with success. If you need a refresher, just check out or guide to net neutrality as well as our interview with advocate and law professor Tim Wu. Now, we just have to wait and see what tomorrow will bring.
US Senate passes patent system reform bill, Obama expected to sign into law
Think it's time to change our patent system? So does Congress. Yesterday, the Senate approved the America Invents Act by an 89-8 vote that could bring about the most drastic changes to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in five decades. Under the bill, which the House approved back in June, patents would be awarded not to the first person to invent a technology, but to the first one to actually file with the USPTO, bringing US policy in line with protocol adopted in most other countries. It also calls for a streamlined application process and would allow the USPTO to charge set fees for all apps. The revenue generated from these fees would go directly to a capped reserve fund, allowing the office to retain the lion's share of the money, rather than funneling much of it to Congress, as had become the norm. Supporters say this extra revenue will give the USPTO more power to chip away at its backlog of some 700,000 patent applications, while a new third-party challenge system will help eliminate patents that should've never received approval in the first place. Opponents, meanwhile, criticized the bill for not eliminating fee diversion altogether (an amendment that would've placed more severe restrictions was ultimately killed, for fear that it would jeopardize the bill's passage), with Washington Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell questioning the legislation's impact on small businesses, calling it "a big corporation patent giveaway that tramples on the rights of small inventors." But Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who sponsored the bill, argued that yesterday's approval marks a major and historic inflection point in US patent policy: The creativity that drives our economic engine has made America the global leader in invention and innovation. The America Invents Act will ensure that inventors large and small maintain the competitive edge that has put America at the pinnacle of global innovation. This is historic legislation. It is good policy. The America Invents Act will now make its way to President Obama's desk, where it's expected to receive his signature. For more background on the legislation, check out the links below.
Apple spending some of its cash in US Capitol
Apple has a large cash reserve and it's using some of the those funds to lobby Congress. Judging by the money that's passing hands, Apple is taking its lobbying efforts seriously. In the second quarter of 2011, Apple spent a whopping US$790,000 on lobbying. This is more than double what the company spent in the same quarter of 2010 and up $230,000 from the first quarter of 2011. Apple is reportedly using this money to influence issues like patent reform, electronic waste, and consumer privacy. You don't need to look too far back in the news cycle to appreciate how these three issues greatly affect Apple and other tech companies. Patent litigation is out of control with both tech companies and patent holding companies suing each other in court. Tech companies are also struggling to providing personalized, location-based services without compromising customer's privacy.
Senate Bill 978 not much of a danger to YouTube game runthroughs
When we're too busy to actually play Gitaroo Man, we happily resort to watching "Let's Play" runthrough videos of Gitaroo Man. Unfortunately, an addendum to federal copyright laws currently working its way through our country's legislative channels seeks to make streaming videos of copyrighted content just as illegal as pirating films -- the penalties for which are displayed every time you start up a video. Fortunately, This is My Next has explained why this law wouldn't find much traction in stopping these kinds of nostalgic walkthroughs from being uploaded. The statute can only be enforced in instances where uploaders are "willfully" infringing on a copyright with intent to make money, and is only punishable if said uploader makes (or the game company loses) over $2,500. That's probably not true about a vast majority of the walkthroughs on streaming video sites, meaning our vicarious Gitarooing should continue unabated.
'Let's Play' videos may soon make you a felon thanks to Senate Bill S.978 [Updated]
[Update: This Is My Next's Nilay Patel has published an extensive break-down of S.978, and it looks like the bill, if passed, wouldn't actually change much of anything for the majority of people who don't profit from their YouTube videos. "Some of the outcry here is a little overblown, as the text of the bill isn't quite as bad as you might think."] Hold on to your butts, Internet, because this party is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets any better. According to Game Informer, a Senate Bill has been introduced which, if passed, would make streaming unauthorized copyrighted material a felony, resulting in up to 5-years of jail time. Bill S.978 states that "10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works" will result in "not more than 5 years" of imprisonment, so long as the performance in question is valued at at-least $2,500 USD, or if the value of a license to legally "perform" the content is valued at $5,000 or more. These are, in essence, the same criteria that allow for DMCA take-down notices to be issued by copyright holders, however jail time and felony status are not currently associated with this particular flavor of copyright infringement. Should this bill jump through all the right hoops, its broadly worded contents could potentially cover everything from homemade gameplay clips (commonly referred to "Let's Play" videos), to fan-made music videos, webcam cover songs, and anything else that involves copyrighted music or video. S.978 could also potentially cover cell-phone videos of concerts and press events, making 13-year-old Beliebers and jaded gaming journalists alike equally in danger of losing their right to vote. If accepted into law, these addenda will be attached to existing copyright laws and will not only apply to YouTube users, but to the sites that embed YouTube content as well. Internet activism group Demand Progress has set up a web-form for those who disagree with the legislation and wish to communicate their displeasure to their local representatives. We would be concerned about the bill's implications as well, but fear not dear reader: the legislation doesn't cover puppet shows as far as we can tell, so Joystiq Playhouse's shadow-kabuki production of Battle Arena Toshinden should still be on track.
