[TNham] Re: Questionable bills being introduced - A reply

[Perry Ogletree]

It will be interesting to see how the bill has been amended.  I still
believe that the "intent to defraud" is a wide open door.  As an example,
suppose you choose to place an open WiFi access point on your broadband
connection to allow neighborhood Internet access.  You have no "intent to
defraud" but your broadband provider may disagree.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Hawks" <chuck_hawks@hotmail.com>
To: <tnham@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 8:44 AM
Subject: [TNham] Re: Questionable bills being introduced - A reply


> I contacted my State Represntative, Mark Maddox, and received this reply.
It
> is shared with his permission.
>
> Chuck Hawks - KE4ETH
> Shirley Hawks - KE4KHF
>
> Chuck and Shirley,
>
> I share an office with the bill's sponsor.  When I asked him about it, he
> indicated that your problem had been solved in an amendment.
> The following is his response to complaints about the bill:
>
> There has been much misinformation spread about this bill, my intent in
> sponsoring it (contrary to popular belief, I have never been contacted by
> anyone from the Motion Picture Association of America regarding this
> legislation, ever), what it accomplishes, and what it prohibits. I
> introduced this legislation because of a real problem regarding theft of
> voice, video, and data communications. The value of that theft last year
is
> estimated to be between $100-130 million. I know that none of the
interested
> parties, including yourself, would condone that behavior as that cost is
> passed on to legitimate purchasers of these communications services. Once
> the bill was introduced, parties from all sides began meeting to work out
an
> amendment to clarify that to violate the provisions of this proposed law,
> one must have the intent to defraud or steal something that would
otherwise
> have to be purchased. These parties have included consumer electronic
> manufacturers, computer software designers, computer network
professionals,
> and librarians. It does not at all relate to copyrighted material, as
those
> issues are pre-empted by federal law. The amendment also makes it
abundantly
> clear that legislation would not make illegal legitimate computer designs
or
> applications relating to networks and firewalls, nor the encrypting of
data
> associated with those applications. I am continuing to work on the
amendment
> to address any specific concerns. However, the vast majority of those who
> have contacted me have not seen and/or read the amendment to the bill. To
> help people understand what the legislation will look like as amended, I
> have scheduled a meeting in my office, 17 Legislative Plaza, on Tuesday,
> May, 6, at 10:00am. Please feel free to attend this meeting. I look
forward
> to working with you to develop a piece of legislation that accomplishes my
> intent without compromising your legitimate activities.
>
> After looking at the amendment, would you please let me know if you think
it
> solves your problem with the bill?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark L. Maddox
> State Representative
>
> *****************************************************************
> Nashville Office Address: 17 Legislative Plaza
>                                       Nashville, TN  37243
> Nashville Phone:  Toll Free: 1-800-449-8366 ext. 17847
>                           Toll Call: 615-741-7847
>                           FAX:         615-253-0293
>
> Dresden Office Address:  8250 Highway 22
>                                      Dresden, TN  38225
> Dresden Office Phone:     731-364-2685
> Dresden Office FAX:        731-364-3580
>
> _______________________________________________
> TNham mailing list
> TNham@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tnham
>