Analog Hole Bill Would Impose a Secret Law
Monday January 23, 2006 by Ed Felten
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=958

If you¹ve been reading here lately, you know that I¹m no fan of the
Sensenbrenner/Conyers analog hole bill. The bill would require almost all
analog video devices to implement two technologies called CGMS-A and VEIL.
CGMS-A is reasonably well known, but the VEIL content protection technology
is relatively new. I wanted to learn more about it.

So I emailed the company that sells VEIL and asked for a copy of the
specification. I figured I would be able to get it. After all, the bill
would make compliance with the VEIL spec mandatory ‹ the spec would in
effect be part of the law. Surely, I thought, they¹re not proposing passing
a secret law. Surely they¹re not going to say that the citizenry isn¹t
allowed to know what¹s in the law that Congress is considering. We¹re
talking about television here, not national security.

After some discussion, the company helpfully explained that I could get the
spec, if I first signed their license agreement. The agreement requires me
(a) to pay them $10,000, and (b) to promise not to talk to anybody about
what is in the spec. In other words, I can know the contents of the bill
Congress is debating, but only if I pay $10k to a private party, and only if
I promise not to tell anybody what is in the bill or engage in public debate
about it.

Worse yet, this license covers only half of the technology: the VEIL
decoder, which detects VEIL signals. There is no way you or I can find out
about the encoder technology that puts VEIL signals into video.

The details of this technology are important for evaluating this bill. How
much would the proposed law increase the cost of televisions? How much would
it limit the future development of TV technology? How likely is the
technology to mistakenly block authorized copying? How adaptable is the
technology to the future? All of these questions are important in debating
the bill. And none of them can be answered if the technology part of the
bill is secret.

Which brings us to the most interesting question of all: Are the members of
Congress themselves, and their staffers, allowed to see the spec and talk
about it openly? Are they allowed to consult experts for advice? Or are the
full contents of this bill secret even from the lawmakers who are
considering it?



You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to