Last week, GamePolitics reported on Yahoo! Games' recap of where the major presidential candidates stand on video game issues.
Cnet's Declan McCullagh has now penned an insightful article which outlines how the top candidates view some critical technology issues. While not game-specific, some of these issues will certainly affect gamers in a significant way. Writes McCullagh:
Who would be the most tech-friendly president?
The short answer: it depends. Do you like the idea of Net neutrality so much that you'd hand the Federal Communications Commission the authority to levy open-ended Internet regulations? Do you support pro-fair use changes to copyright law, which many programmers and computer scientists do--but which practically all software and video game companies oppose?
McCullagh sought the candidates' positions on seven key tech issues: Net neutrality legislation; Telecom spying immunity; DMCA fair use reform; Supports Real ID Act; ISP data retention required; Permanent Net-tax ban; and Increased H1-B visas.
Of these, Net neutrality and DMCA fair use reform are probably of the most immediate interest to gamers, so we'll look at those.
On Net neutrality, the question posed to the candidates was:
Congress has considered Net neutrality legislation, but it never became law. Do you support the legislation that was re-introduced in 2007 (S 215), which gives the FCC the power to punish "discriminatory" conduct by broadband providers?
Those strongly in favor of Net neutrality: Clinton, Obama
Those opposed: McCain, Paul
"Maybe": Huckabee
Ducked question: Romney
On DMCA fair use reform, the question posed to the candidates was:
The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act's section restricting the "circumvention" of copy protection measures is supported by many copyright holders but has been criticized by some technologists as hindering innovation. Would you support changing the DMCA to permit Americans to make a single backup copy of a DVD, Blu-ray Disc DVD, HD DVD, or video game disc they have legally purchased?
Those probably in favor: Obama, Paul
Ducked question: Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Clinton
Read McCullagh's full article here...
Comments
She did WHAT?! She condemned Don Imus and helped the team 'through the healing process'. That really is political BS at it's upmost finest. Listen if you can be deeply hurt by a not-eve-remotely serious joke when the person who said it apologised repeatedly, one wonders how the hell you are tough enough to handle sports.
Please tell me Barack didn't do the same thing.
the world would implode from the awesomeness!
Just saying, maybe you shouldn't go throwing terms like communism and nanny around if you're just as guilty. Both parties want to run our lives, just different parts. Republicans want to run our sex lives and legislate morality in all sorts of ways, and dems want more control over our money and economy.
I do get a good chuckle out of a person denouncing big government out of one side of their mouth, then praising Republicans out the other.
Also if you look at the polls of who votes for Obama in the primaries, its all blacks and upper class liberals. These are voters that any democrat already has; Hillary would get these voters in a genral election too. But Hillarys voters (hispanics, blue collar white democrats, older democrats) could vote for McCain.
This is why people support Hillary. They dont think she's that great, but they know, contrary to what you hear in the media, that she is much more likely to win a general eleciton. And with the supreme court on the line (up to 3 nominations for the next president), this is extremely important for civl liberties and for video games. Although Hillary demagogues video games, she is very likely to nominate judges with a liberal interpretation of the 1st Amendment.
That is how Id run for Office too. Id criticise video games (to get votes) and then nominate judges that would protect free expression for them. Thats how politics work.
I find it hard to believe Microsoft supports Net Neutrality (that website you left said it does). They want monthly payment for everything (such as playing online when you already have internet i.e. Xbox Live & PC Live) and are major copyrighters. They are trying to shut down other companies so there is no competition.
That'd be because Net Neutrality is about ISPs that own the physical network cables, and Microsoft isn't an ISP that owns a bunch of physical network cables. It's to Microsoft's disadvantage if, say, Comcast was legally allowed to charge their customers ten dollars extra if they wanted to reach Microsoft's website at anything resembling a decent speed, and charge Microsoft a thousand dollars extra for Comcast's subscribers to be able to reach Microsoft's website at all.
In short, Net Neutrality favors everyone except big telecoms, and Microsoft, along with the other big companies listed aren't big telecoms. So of course Microsoft would favor it, despite their general anti-competitive bent. They already pay a princely sum for the bandwidth needed to ensure that their customers can reach their web presence unhindered. They don't want every telecom extracting a pound of flesh from them on top of that.
Mickey Mouse/Goofy is better =p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Entertainment_Protection_Act
That says everything I loathe about her in a nutshell. It should speak volumes to every gamer here on whether or not to vote for her. And dammit, despite the numbers, I hope everyone realizes that this crazy windbag shouldn't be president before it's too late... not because she's a woman, but because she's a woman who doesn't necessarily have the best agendas in mind.
I disagree once in office he has no choice but to walk the middle, and "they" would be a better choice than the brain eating zombie lords from the reapers and dims.....
...okay, i'm Canadian. But I think that America should be allowed to make that personal copy. If I could vote I would go Obama right now...