Who Are the Tech-Friendly Candidates?

February 6, 2008 -

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

Am I the only one here who supported Edwards, or wishes the Dem ticket will be Obama/Edwards (since the two don't have much bad blood in them)?

@warotter

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.

How about Obama and Ron paul as his VP =^^=

the world would implode from the awesomeness!

I just looked it up and Barack also condemned Imus . . . crap. Oh well, stuff like that usually don't get the president involved.

Bugs Bunny/Daffy Duck 08'

Of course Hillary Clinton ducked the DMCA question; her husband signed the damn thing into law in the FIRST place.

oh how I hope Obama wins if he doesn't then im voting for Kratos

As a Republican, I'll obviously be putting my vote towards McCain. However, if I was a Democrat, I can say right now that I'd rather see Obama in office; I'm strongly opposed towards Hillary's "nanny-state" policy... sounds more like communism to me, it does.

I see a lot of Republicans talking about the nanny state. I just have a simple reminder that NCLBA put the feds in charge of our school, oddly enough without sufficient fed funding. They also made it legal to wiretap any phone call they see fit without a warrant. Currently, they are trying to make sure any Telco participating in illegal wiretapping has retroactive immunity. Not to mention a 6 year record of spending no Democrat could match.

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.

Obama cant win. He's got a free pass from the press so far, but that would change if he's the nominee, and he'll be savaged by the republicans. Theyre staying quiet for now in hopes that he'll be the nominee and then they can unload on him.

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.

@Gray17:
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.

@Tricause

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.

@monkeypeaches

Mickey Mouse/Goofy is better =p

Why do I personally hate Hillary? Four words....

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.

Broken Scope
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.....

Ron Paul would be for Net Neutrality as it would allow freedom for internet users. This article is pretty much wrong considering this fact. Anything that constitutes a violation of individual freedom Paul is against and not having Net Neutrality is one of those violations.

This just in, Mitt Romney is dropping out.

MAX FOR PRESIDENT!

...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...
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
benohawkI doubt it would of helped goth. it seems a lot of the people who blew up were just waiting for any issue to let loose07/31/2015 - 3:25pm
Andrew EisenI disagree with blaming an overreaction on what people are overreacting to.07/31/2015 - 3:24pm
Goth_Skunkpositions and apologize for any confusion they may have caused. Unless their intent WAS to provoke a sleeping lion, in which case... here we are.07/31/2015 - 3:20pm
Goth_SkunkAn overreaction that probably would not have happened if Gamasutra's article was the only one ever written. And an overreaction that could have also been calmed had the authors all collectively retracted or written follow-up pieces to clarify their07/31/2015 - 3:20pm
benohawkAndrew, neither side is blameless there. Through poor planning or deliberate attempts to offend those articles did push a bad situation to the worse. and the people who blew up are guilty for their reaction07/31/2015 - 3:19pm
Andrew EisenGoth - And the blame for that rests solely on the ding bats who grossly overreacted to a handful of opinion pieces.07/31/2015 - 3:11pm
Andrew EisenHere's a fun fact: Only two of the authors of the "Gamers Are Dead" articles (of which there are about 12) were on the Game Journo Pros list.07/31/2015 - 3:10pm
Goth_SkunkNo! No! Of course not! Nothing wrong with that at all! Nevermind that those articles spawned a huge, almost year-long consumer revolt and culture war that no one in the industry can deny exists. :^)07/31/2015 - 3:10pm
Andrew EisenThere's also nothing wrong with publishing an opinion you know is going to be unpopular with some. So long as it's genuine, anyway.07/31/2015 - 3:08pm
Andrew EisenEh, could be laziness, lack of imagination, bandwagon hopping or maybe Alexander's article inspired them to publish their own takes. Nothing wrong with that.07/31/2015 - 3:06pm
Goth_SkunkIf laziness was indeed the reason other sites produced articles of a similar vein, the laziness must reach levels that would make a cat blush. How lazy does one have to be unable to stop and think "maybe this isn't a good idea...'07/31/2015 - 3:04pm
Andrew EisenThe Mary Sue article title I'm a bit more comfortable being called clickbait as it's a deliberate misdirection but it's done for humor's sake so I personally give such things a pass.07/31/2015 - 3:01pm
Andrew EisenI count six similar titles and two of the authors aren't even journalists, let alone game journalists. It doesn't reek of collusion, it reeks of laziness, if anything. A few others saw Alexander's piece and wrote their own.07/31/2015 - 3:00pm
Goth_Skunkfeed. Additionally, I'm baffled by the irony of someone named 'Infophile' taking a Mary Sue article seriously. Ignoring that I won't give that site a second of my time, that article headline is blatant clickbait and should be ignored on principle.07/31/2015 - 2:58pm
Goth_SkunkI agree with Benohawk: The title of the article meant that the article was worth ignoring. Alas, when 9 additional sites pop up with similarly titled articles of their own, it reeks of collusion and an attempt by the press at large to bite the hands that07/31/2015 - 2:56pm
Andrew EisenAh, okay.07/31/2015 - 2:46pm
benohawkI'm saying that the refrence in the article to the old title would need to be changed well the primary point of the article would be kept the same. Not something that should be an issue if the objective wasn't to be provocative.07/31/2015 - 2:41pm
Andrew EisenYou're saying the article should be altered to fit a different title. I want to know what title you find more appropriate for the copy as is.07/31/2015 - 2:34pm
benohawkIt would take a minor rewrite to the article, but I'd call it 'What is a Gamer' but go for the same point. you don't have to sell to jerks07/31/2015 - 2:33pm
Andrew EisenI still say "clickbait" is thrown around way too casually, to the point where it's completely meaningless. That aside, what alternate title would you suggest?07/31/2015 - 2:22pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician