[News.com] CNET's Technology Voter's Guide

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Ron Paul

I believe that this can be best accomplished through deregulation and allowing the free market to work. Federal grants and subsidies will only elevate certain providers while holding back others. If the high-speed Internet access market is allowed to work without interference, fierce competition will drive down prices, as it did with dial-up access.

Originally Posted by Hillary Clinton

Broadband is the infrastructure of the 21st century. It will play an important role in everything from commerce to education to the delivery of medicine. Our relatively low broadband penetration rate is unacceptable. I believe that there is a role for private industry and for the federal government to play in expanding access to broadband.

As president, I will strengthen tax incentives for extending broadband to underserved areas. I will support state and local broadband initiatives, from new wireless technologies to high-speed fiber optics. And I will change the FCC rules so that we finally have an accurate, detailed picture of broadband deployment and penetration rates.
At present, the FCC data is unreliable because it is based on loose estimates and outdated standards. I will also create a public-private partnership to effectively map broadband availability and broadband demand, and to extend broadband to every corner of every state in the country.

Originally Posted by John Edwards

There should be no neighborhoods in America where the lights of the Internet are not on. Yet--partly because we have never had a national broadband strategy--the country that developed the Internet is now 16th in broadband deployment, and America's competitiveness has suffered. The spread of broadband has been uneven and costly, too driven by the profits of a few entrenched companies and technologies to allow the nation as a whole to realize the billions in economic benefits promised by truly universal Internet access. As president, I will set a goal of giving all U.S. homes and businesses access to real high-speed Internet by 2010. I will establish a national broadband map to identify gaps in availability, price, and speed. I will also create public-private partnerships to promote deployment and require providers not to discriminate against rural and low-income areas. I will work to improve Internet accessibility for people with disabilities. I believe we need to improve the e-rate program with a goal of universally wired schools.
Since achieving truly universal broadband will require every tool at our disposal, I will also encourage local service providers and municipal wireless projects, and use the newly available 700MHz spectrum and broadcast television white spaces to support wireless networks that can connect with all digital devices.

Originally Posted by John McCain

I believe that we must promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher-quality services for consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new technologies. I have been a leading advocate in the Senate for seeking market-based solutions to increasing broadband penetration. We should place the federal government in the role of stimulator, rather than regulator, of broadband services, remove state and local barriers to broadband deployment, and facilitate deployment of broadband services to rural and underserved communities.

Originally Posted by Obama

I believe that America should lead the world in broadband penetration and Internet access. As a country, we have ensured that every American has access to telephone service and electricity, regardless of economic status, and I will do likewise for broadband Internet access. Full broadband penetration can enrich democratic discourse, enhance competition, provide economic growth, and bring significant consumer benefits. Moreover, improving our infrastructure will foster competitive markets for Internet access and services that ride on that infrastructure. Market forces will drive the deployment of broadband in many parts of the country, but not all. To get true broadband deployed in every community in America, we need to reform the Universal Service Fund, make better use of the nation's wireless spectrum, promote next-generation facilities, technologies, and applications, and provide new tax and loan incentives.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Ron Paul

No. Net neutrality legislation will hamper the development of new Internet services and harm consumers in the long run. The best way to address the concerns of proponents of Net neutrality is to remove government-imposed barriers to entry into the Internet provider market.

Originally Posted by Clinton

Yes. I am an original co-sponsor of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, and I supported its reintroduction. No other communications medium in recent history has had such a profound impact as the Internet on free expression, education, the proliferation of commerce, and the exchange of political ideas. And it is the basic principles of neutrality and nondiscrimination that have allowed the Internet to flourish. Thanks to these principles, a small business has been able to market to the same customers as the biggest corporation. The average citizen has been able to voice grievances in the same forum as the editors of the largest newspaper. And students, entrepreneurs, and consumers have been empowered by the wealth of information and opportunities afforded by an open Internet.
As we continue to build on the innovations brought forth by the Internet, we must ensure that there continues to be open, unimpaired, and unencumbered Internet access for both its users and content providers. We need to ensure that the Internet of the 21st century opens the same doors, creates the same opportunities, and fosters the same innovation that we have seen so far.

Originally Posted by Edwards

In May, I--like thousands of citizens--wrote a letter to the FCC urging them to guarantee Net neutrality. I believe that if we do not guarantee Net neutrality--and at the same time meet the goal of universal broadband access--the Internet could go the way of network television and commercial radio--with just a few loud corporate voices and no room for the grassroots and small entrepreneurs. Our country is already divided enough between the haves and have-nots. Where we go to school, where (and whether) we get health care, whether we can retire with dignity--we have big divides in all of these areas in this country. While we work to create One America, we should not allow the Internet to be divided or corporate censorship to take root. That would make the other important work we have to do that much harder. The Internet is not the answer to everything, but it can powerfully accelerate the best of America. It improves our democracy by making quiet voices loud, improves our economy by making small markets big, and improves opportunity by making unlikely dreams possible.
As president, I will do several things to encourage innovation and neutrality online. First, I will ensure that the FCC preserves free expression and competition on the Internet by enforcing Net neutrality, ensuring no degradation or blocking of access to Web sites. I will also bring the Carterfone interoperability rule to wireless so that Americans can connect any device or applications to their wireless service, just as they can to their landline phone service.

Originally Posted by McCain

In general, I believe that we need to move to a different model for enforcing competition on the Internet. Its focus should be on policing clearly anticompetitive behavior and consumer predation. In such a dynamic and innovative setting, it is not desirable for regulators to be required to anticipate market developments, intervene in the market, and try to micromanage American business and innovation.

Originally Posted by Obama

Yes. As I stated during my visit to Google on November 14, I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality. The Internet is the most open network in history. We have to keep it that way. I will prevent network providers from discriminating in ways that limit the freedom of expression on the Internet. Because most Americans have a choice of only one or two broadband carriers, carriers are tempted to impose a toll charge on content and services, discriminating against Web sites that are unwilling to pay for equal treatment.
This could create a two-tier Internet in which Web sites with the best relationships with network providers can get the fastest access to consumers, while all competing Web sites remain in a slower lane.
Such a result would threaten innovation, the open tradition and architecture of the Internet, and competition among content and backbone providers. It would also threaten the equality of speech through which the Internet has begun to transform American political and cultural discourse.
Accordingly, network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some Web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or nonprofit speakers, have the same opportunity as incumbents to innovate on the Internet and to reach large audiences.
I will protect the Internet's traditional openness to innovation and creativity, and ensure that it remains a platform for free speech and innovation that will benefit consumers and our democracy.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Paul

No. I would in no way support giving them immunity for breaking privacy laws. One of the legitimate functions of the federal government is to protect the privacy of its citizens, not invade it. If private companies cooperated with the federal government in violating the Fourth Amendment rights of their customers, they should be held accountable.

Originally Posted by Clinton

I have said that I oppose retroactive immunity for telecommunications providers, and I oppose the retroactive immunity provisions in the Senate Intelligence Committee bill.

Originally Posted by Edwards

The American people deserve to know about President Bush's illegal spying on Americans. Providing big telecom companies retroactive immunity would mean that the facts about these abuses will never come out in court. Congress should stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law by rejecting any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecom companies.

Originally Posted by McCain

The struggle against Islamic fundamentalism is the transcendent foreign-policy challenge of our time. I am committed to winning this battle, enhancing the stature of the United States as beacon of global hope, and to preserving the personal, economic, and political freedoms that are the proud legacy of the great sacrifices of our fathers. Every effort in this struggle and other efforts must be done according to American principles and the rule of law. When companies provide private records of Americans to the government without proper legal subpoena, warrants, or other legal orders, their heart may be in the right place, but their actions undermine our respect for the law.
I am also a strong supporter of protecting the privacy of Americans. The issues raised by S 2248, and the events and actions by all parties that the preceded it, reach to the core of our principles. They merit careful and deliberate consideration, fact-finding, and exploration of options. That process should be allowed to proceed before drawing conclusions that may prove to be premature.
If retroactive immunity passes, it should be done with explicit statements that this is not a blessing, there should be oversight hearings to understand what happened, and Congress should include provisions that ensure that Americans' private records will not be dealt with like that again.

Originally Posted by Obama

No.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Paul

While I have not yet made a full study of this issue, I would tend to protect the rights of consumers to make a backup copy of materials they have purchased, as long as the consumers complied with any contractual obligations they incurred when purchasing the product.

Originally Posted by Clinton

Strong copyright protections and efforts to stem piracy are critical to ensuring that our technology industries remain competitive in the global market. As we go forward, I would support a review of a range of issues related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act insofar as it did not concern degrading copyright protections or encourage copyright infringements.

Originally Posted by Edwards

While I am not convinced that allowing backup copies is the best reform for consumers or content producers, I do believe that our intellectual property laws and regulations should better balance the industry's legitimate concerns over piracy with common-sense consumer freedoms. Fortunately, consumer demand and innovation are starting to lead the way. Key industry leaders have recognized the limitations of digital rights management technology. One role for government regulation may be better rules governing disclosure, so that people are aware, before they purchase digital media products, of the limitations imposed on their use.

Originally Posted by McCain

The Internet and digital technology have provided widespread access to enormous quantities of information. This, in turn, made it necessary to update our copyright laws in 1998 to protect the rights of copyright holders to keep pace with the technological advances that characterize the Information Age. As digitization of commerce, education, entertainment, and a host of other online applications proceeds, international copyright agreements have to be maintained and updated while protecting the rights of copyright owners.
I believe now, as I did then, that knowledge and ideas are central parts of what make the U.S. economy productive and competitive. It is vital that this intellectual property be protected and defended. However, we must ensure that such protections are never so onerous as to stifle the very innovation they strive to safeguard.

Originally Posted by Obama

I would support, in concept, allowing Americans to make a single backup copy of a digital product they have purchased. And I think the market is moving in the direction of greater consumer freedom. As policymakers, we are in a constant process of examining our laws to ensure that the protections we place on intellectual property are sufficient to encourage invention without hindering innovation that builds on previous work or unfairly limiting consumers from using the goods they purchase in a way that is fair to creators.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Paul

Under the Constitution, the federal government does not have the authority to regulate social-networking sites. I would return this matter to state and local governments. Ultimately, parents are the best suited to protect their own children. Federal intervention should never be a substitute for parental involvement in children's lives.

Originally Posted by Clinton

Protecting children against sexual predators is an issue of great importance to all parents. In the Senate, I was proud to co-sponsor and support the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, which became law in 2006. This legislation strengthened sex offender laws already on the books and updated registration requirements to include Internet offenses. It also places the responsibility on sex offenders to register with local authorities, requires them to notify those authorities when they move or change jobs, and makes it a felony to fail to register.
Additionally, it set national minimum standards for classifying sex offenders, a big step toward eliminating the lag time in classification and registration that occurs when sex offenders move across state lines.
Parents--and all concerned citizens--should have the ability to access information to see if a convicted sex offender is living in their neighborhood or near other places where their children spend time. As president, I will continue to fight to protect children and keep sexual predators from reaching them.

Originally Posted by Edwards

I support legislation such as the Combating Child Exploitation Act, which would give law enforcement agencies the tools they need--such as more trained federal agents and improved computer forensic labs--to investigate and prosecute Internet crimes against children. I also believe that social-networking sites can do more to protect their users. For example, Facebook.com and the New York State attorney general have developed a model partnership for protecting young Web site users. Under their agreement, Facebook will enforce mutually agreed upon safety regulations that include responding to any complaint within 24 hours. They will also allow a third-party examiner to monitor their response to complaints about harassment and inappropriate material. I believe that businesses, parents, and the government have a shared responsibility to protect our children online, and I will support initiatives like these as president.

Originally Posted by McCain

The Internet has a dark side--it can expose children to obscene, graphic, and violent content. Government must develop solutions that balance civil liberties against the compelling interest to protect the innocence of our children. While the first line of defense will always involve responsible parents, when it comes to protecting children, government must not shrink from its responsibilities. One thing that must be absolutely clear is that child pornographers and those who would prey on children will find no quarter in the darker recesses of the Internet. Government must implement and aggressively enforce laws to hunt down and jail peddlers of child pornography and sexual predators who stalk children on the Net.
This is why I have long fought to keep the Internet safe for our children...(and) recently sponsored the Safe Act of 2007, designed to clarify and enhance the current system for electronic-service providers to report online child pornography, and make the failure to report child pornography a federal crime.
I have also aggressively sought to curtail the online activities of sex offenders by sponsoring legislation to ensure that such criminals register additional information such as e-mail addresses on sex offender registries.

Originally Posted by Obama

What is needed is greater resources for law enforcement to fully enforce the law against sex offenders, greater education to empower kids and teens to recognize the threat and guard themselves against the threat, and parents who are engaged in their kids' lives. Social-networking sites are just one way sex offenders seek out victims, and I would not support targeting them specifically, but I would be open to any legislation that would make it easier for law enforcement to bring sex offenders to justice.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Paul

No, I do not. Such legislation poses a serious risk to privacy. The federal government has no right tracking who uses the Internet and why they are doing so.

Originally Posted by Clinton

Our primary concern must always be the protection of our children. I believe that we must strike a balance between blanket data retention and activity tracking of all Internet users that some bills propose, and legitimate law enforcement efforts to seek out online predators who are using the Internet to prey on victims. I would support effective and constitutional efforts to strengthen law enforcement's ability to track and stop online predators. Simultaneously, I would ensure that the privacy rights of lawful users of the Internet are protected.

Originally Posted by Edwards

I strongly support giving law enforcement the tools it needs to prevent and respond swiftly to illegal acts online. As a parent of two young children, I take the dangers of child exploitation seriously and personally. But I do not believe that having the government force Internet companies to keep logs on regular Americans' online activity--beyond these companies' already extensive data retention--is necessary or wise. This administration has fully demonstrated how government can overreach, violating Americans' privacy as well as the law. As president, I will strive to keep Americans safe, and do so in a way that repairs the trust relationship between the president and the American people.

Originally Posted by McCain

I continue to study the legislation in particular and the issue in general. It is apparent that some well-informed analysts in the ISP, tech, and privacy communities are skeptical of the feasibility and value of this proposal. At the same time, other interested parties, such as the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, support the approach taken in the legislation. I understand both perspectives, believe that further study and alternative proposals are worth exploring, and look forward to finding the best path forward for all those involved.

Originally Posted by Obama

No.

Originally Posted by CNET

Originally Posted by Paul

I support either abolishing or greatly reducing as many taxes as possible, and placing money back into the hands of individuals and businesses. Therefore, I would support a permanent research-and-development tax credit, as well as a permanent moratorium on Internet access taxes.

Originally Posted by Clinton

As part of my Innovation Agenda, I have called for making the R&D tax credit permanent. A permanent tax credit will eliminate uncertainty and make it easier for companies to plan their R&D budgets. This will make America a more attractive location for R&D facilities and increase the likelihood that high-paying research jobs will be created here rather than abroad. I have co-sponsored legislation to extend the moratorium on Internet taxes.

Originally Posted by Edwards

As part of my plan to recharge American innovation, I have proposed making the research and development tax credit--as well as the renewable production tax credit to usher in a new energy economy--permanent. In the Senate, I voted to extend the moratorium on Internet access taxes.

Originally Posted by McCain

We stand on the threshold of a new era: the innovation age. New information and communications technologies are the leading edge of technology innovations that will permeate every aspect of our society, and I am committed to federal policies that ensure America's competitive edge in technology and innovation. Maintaining our tech edge requires robust basic research and sustained development efforts. I will support innovation by funding basic research, and reforming and making permanent the R&D tax credit. My leadership first kept the Internet tax-free, I recently sponsored legislation that extended that tax ban for seven years, and I seek to permanently ban taxing access to this source of innovation and growth.

Originally Posted by Obama

a) Yes.
b) Yes.

Originally Posted by CyberDruid

I am really surprised you did not include Cthulhu's positions on these points Paul..but good work nonetheless.