Entry Archive

From Governor Dean

Thanks for all the comments on the blog last night. I haven’t had a chance to read all of the comments— we flew up from Miami to DC last night. But I will read them.

Let me be perfectly honest. In the space of this week on the blog, I will not be able to answer every specific question. I know that people here care deeply about intellectual property. I’m here to listen.

As a doctor, I’m trained to base my decisions on facts. This President never adequately laid out the facts for going to war with Iraq—perhaps, as it turns out, because the facts were not there. I opposed the war not because I’m a pacifist—I’m not—but because the evidence presented did not justify preemptive war. I opposed needle exchanges for drug addicts until I saw the empirical evidence that showed how such exchanges reduce the spread of disease. I changed my position, and I’m proud of that. Facts are a better basis for decisions than ideology.

No matter what the issues are that we as individuals care most about— whether intellectual property, healthy care, the environment — I believe that the only way we are ever going to come to a real solution on any of these issues is if we all stand together against the special interests in Washington. There are now 33 lobbyists for every member of congress. How do we change that? By working together. One of the amazing things about this campaign is how the Internet has allowed people to meet and work together in common cause. Only by taking an active part in our democracy will we be able to restore a government of, by and for the people.

Thanks again, Howard Dean

posted by [ Howard Dean ] on [ Jul 15 03 at 6:47 AM ] to [ ]

« Back to Lessig News
« Back to the Lessig Blog

Comments on “From Governor Dean”

Thanks for today’s post Dr. Dean. I agree with your evaluation of our involvement in the Gulf War.
BKMD

Thank you for your post, Governor. And thank you for listening. It is refreshing to have a politician actually indicate a willingness to learn. Basing decision on facts? Will wonders never cease…

I do have a question about something you said: “There are now 33 lobbyists for every member of congress. How do we change that? By working together.” Fine words, but in a practical sense how can we change that? Let us say that a groundswell of support places you in the Oval Office. Now what? Those members of Congress are used to having those lobbyists treat them well. They are not going to want to get rid of them. They will fight any attempt to change the status quo. With the implicit support of the media, they will hang onto what they have regardless of your intentions.

I guess what I’m asking is how your words can amount to anything more than just another empty campaign promise? And yes, I’m being sincere, and I welcome specifics in any response. I may be cynical, but I’m willing to listen as well.

“Facts are a better basis for decisions than ideology. “
When a decision is made obviously one’s ideology will provide the background for choosing what to do. Surely, Doctor, you recognize the concept of perspective when approaching an issue. Until the science of internal medicine was properly developed (by “dead white men”) facts about bile, and blue airs and green airs were the “facts” that supported medical decisions.
In regards to our wars against Afghanistan (sp?), Iraq, perhaps Syria, “North” Korea and others - those that make the final decision base it on an ideology that recognizes the benefit to humanity of a strong America. This beacon of liberty needs to be “constantly watered with the blood of tyrants.” In other words the constant expansion of freedom. The ideology allows us to understand international affairs a certain way - of course ideology is central to this.

p.s. as for my reference to Ayn Rand yesterday; I don’t think every time someone mentions “big brother” they have to refer to Orwell, so too every time someone mentions an “Equalization of Opportunity Bill” they don’t have to refer to Rand.

Governor, Hope you squeeze in time to read the comments. There are some gems there that will prove beneficial as you define specific policies for your future administration.

You mention using facts versus ideology as a decision making tool. Great! Of course one can subscribe to any particular set of facts (or media supported falsehoods) to support an argument. By looking at a problem from different angles one often comes up with conflicting solutions. I hope you can give some time to elaborating on your decision making process and how you plan to use citizen involvement (versus insider government) to deal with this.

I know it’s early in the campaign and candidates are loathe to make specific promises, but will you keep this type of forum in a future presidency? Will we one day go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/blog/ to let our views be known?

‘I opposed the war not because I’m a pacifist—I’m not—but because the evidence presented did not justify preemptive war. I opposed needle exchanges for drug addicts until I saw the empirical evidence ‘

Let me be the first to suggest that national security and the threat of terrorism aren’t equivalent to needle exchange programs. I’m pulling for you but in order to win outside of Vt. and Mass you’re going to have to show that you understand that without national security we won’t really have a domestic agenda. Sticking our heads in the sand isn’t going to work.

Do they print Atlas Shrugged on two-ply?

No I don’t believe they do. But I believe you can find copies of Das Kapital in the history section of your local library, under genocide.

I haven’t had a chance to read all of the comments- … But I will read them.

Seth,
Take a chill pill Phil.

Thanks again, governor Dean.

What really makes me nervous is lobbyists’ increasing role in actually drafting our laws. Who actually reads and analyzes the entire text of a given bill? Not most Congressmen, I would venture to guess. Hardly any journalists. And almost no one in the general public. Maybe a staffer or two, but that’s all. On the hot button issues there is some oversight but on things that corporations care more about than the general public (e.g., the bankruptcy “reform” bill several years back).

And of course ideology plays a role in most decisions—but when ideology comes into conflict with the facts, the ideology must yield to the facts, not the other way around. Ideology in a vacuum is an incredibly destructive force, as the USSR and Eastern Europe in the age of the iron curtain prove.

I hope that I am not alone here, but I think that national security decisions absolutely need to be based on facts.

With the war in Iraq, the facts so far have shown that there was no national security threat. Now, that may change if something new pops up, but the only solace Americans can find in that war now was the removal of a dictator from power.

Lets say another situation pops up - a situation that poses an imminent threat to the United States. How will be able to address that effectively. At this moment, we are unprepared to do so. That is a current fact that we must face.

Ideology can give perspective in order to analyze and make decisions on facts. However, I agree with the Governor that Ideology cannot replace fact.

“We should have decisions based on facts, not facts based on decisions”

Now, it is a more difficult scenario for IP. There are some who believe all creative material is personal property, there are others that believe it is public domain. The facts in these cases, essentially, are based on existing laws, and thus are subjective.
That is why it is necessary to dig harder to find the root of IP below current laws and perspectives.

Dr. Dean,

Copyright reform is something that is very important to us. If you have not had time to consider the Eldred Act, please look it over. There are a growing number of people who are concerned about the imbalance between the rights of innovators and the public domain. Specifically, many of us disagree with the ongoing push by the U.S. Government to continually extend copyrights to works that have already been published. The Constitution specifically grants Congress the right to establish copyright terms in order to promote the Arts and Sciences. The current Copyright laws do not, in our opinion, do this. Please consider supporting legislation aimed at returning old and abandoned works to the public domain, where they can inspire new generations of artists - like the ones that brought us Mickey Mouse and Cinderella.

The Eldred Act

Respectfully,
Dana Powers
citizen and voter

I hope that everyone here will agree that the rationale used for Gulf War II was faulty. The Bush Doctrine clearly states that we will use preemptive force to deal with an imminent thread. World opinion abroad and at home is finally realizing that the threat was not imminent, and way overblown. Invasion was not warranted even under the criteria. What we now have is the political equivilent of big tobacco-funded scientists proving that cigarettes don’t cause cancer…

I would be interested in seeing a similar National Security Strategy from the Dean camp. The National Security issues page provides a good start, and I recommend others read it before posting. It is reasoned and well thought out.

Gotta agree with the man called Seth. This was nothing more than stump-speech bullpwop, and you do us a major disservice by coming in, as “guest” blogger, and then turning around and dropping something like that in.

Give us more on what was so wrong with the Dixie Chicks. As I understand it, there was no gigantic directive by the radio stations, it was on a case-by-case basis. Instead of owning up to the fact that she said something REALLY STUPID, the fat cow Natalie Maines decided to have a crybaby fit about how mean it was for everyone to stop playing what she claims passes for music on the radio.

While I do agree that radio consolidation has been horrible, and has degraded the listening quality of radio across the country, the treatment of the Dixie Chicks had nothing to do with whether a station was Clear Channel or not. You have picked a bad example to push that on there.

Give us more on the DMCA, the Sonny Bono Copyright-In-Perpetuity (and Rape of the Public Domain) Act. Tell us what YOU think, what YOU believe about them. Tell us what YOU think that the balance for copyright should be. Talk to us about the differences in medium, where copyright should be different for music and books, which last for generations, as opposed to copyrights on computer software, since computer software is often obsoleted and the equipment it was made to run on all but nonexistent in as little as 5 years.

You have to work hard to get my vote. You ought to have to work hard to get every American’s vote, though the sad truth of the matter is that there are a lot of highly uneducated people out there, who vote not on the issues but because someone comes up with a sob story, or a fright story, or MediScare, or the “Oh the Republicans hate Blacks” bit. Show us you’re a Democrat who’s above those sort of tactics, unlike your fellows.

If you supposedly work on facts, and expect us to do the same, then GIVE US THE FACTS. Give us the facts about what you believe, about issues that matter to us. And stop trying to out-liberal every other DemocRat out there. You only do yourself a disservice by doing so.

Who is Joe Teppi? (re: Seth’s post)

Seth, what have I told you about that annoying bold font?

Whether you like it or not, Seth, your voice represents more than just how you feel right now. You represent online freedom. You represent the fight against censorship. How do you expect people to take your message seriously if you keep posting like that? I don’t mind you speaking your mind, but that font has to go. It screams ‘HEY LISTEN TO ME IM IMPORTANT’. People tend not to listen when you do that. You are generally very insightful and wonderfully skeptical. Thats great, just don’t be annoying, or no one is going to care.

Paul,
The Bush Doctrine might be faulty. I don’t know, as we don’t have a firm test case yet.

The raw fact of the matter is that Gulf War II NEVER EXISTED. What we had recently was a continuation of Gulf War I. There was only a cease-fire in place on Gulf War I, never a formal surrender or declaration of peace. The Cease-Fire negotiated by the UN was predicated on Saddam Hussein following up on his obligations.

Well, he didn’t. And 17 UN Resolutions stating that later, we RESUMED Gulf War I. It was not a new conflict. It was the same conflict. The Cease-Fire had been breached. Saddam was not willing to fulfill his obligations properly. He knew the consequences. The first Gulf War had not ended any more than the Korean Conflict has ever ended. Lest we forget, they hold a continual staring match across no-man’s land to this day, and the slightest weapons fire or RPG shot could reignite that war.

My only regret is that Bill Clinton didn’t have the balls to do what needed to be done. And I thank President Bush for being the better man of the two.

Natalie Maines is not a fat cow. Last time I checked, she didn’t eat grass and live on a farm. Plus most cows are not fat, but I digress. Stick to the facts, jack.
If you don’t like her for some other reason, that’s fine. But personal attacks are so…uneducated.

Heather,

Joe Teppi is nonexistent. Seth mispelled Joe Trippi’s name. Joe Trippi, meanwhile, is Gov. Dean’s campaign manager, who presumably is the one dropping in a cutting from some lame speech and dressing it up as a blog post.

Whoa there me@me.com. Dean is not Lessig. Don’t expect him to be fully up to speed on these complex issues. I find it refreshing that he’s taking his message here. Yesterday media consolidation, today treating politics like a science, we’ll see what unfolds this week. Remember, he says “I’m here to listen.”

Make your point with reason and clarity and perhaps you and I can influence government at the highest levels. Contrast that with his comments on the number of lobbyists, who always are getting their message heard.

Plus I can’t wait to see Dr. Dean discussing his favorite music released under a Creative Commons license or the latest Disney flick :)

Increasingly, Dr. Dean, you are sounding like the nicely packaged candidate - “listening” - and repeating your “message” over and over again here and elsewhere. Is this what we are to come to expect from your campaign?

What made your campaign exciting and interesting was that you took a stand on many issues, not just the war - did intellectual property JUST appear on your desk? Haven’t you had at least several months to do more than “listen?” What is your position on labor, not just disjointed remarks - but a policy position people can point to? Give us something as concrete on THESE issues as you do on health insurance policy.

Blogging may seem cool in the press - but blog without substance and I begin to yawn. I feel like you are falling right back into that famililar old political models - even far before you might normally feel the pull (after the primaries.) Ugghh.

Hi Gov. Dean - I think one of the greatest untapped sources of votes in this country is the student population. There are around 20 million students of voting age, and yet only some paltry percentage of us actually excercises our greatest democratic right. Every election year candidates and the press whine about how low voter turnout is, especially among young people. Give us something to vote for! I think it would be a great idea to reach out to young voters with a dedicated campaign targeting just students. We tend to be forward thinking, open-minded, and sick of the usual jelly-backboned, say-anything-to-get-elected politicians; you would be the perfect candidate to get students riled up.

Just as your campaign has revolutionized the use of the internet in politics, revolutionize the effect of young people on politics!

I think all of our interests would be best served by focussing on issues, instead of ranting about how political campaigns are run. “Out-liberal”? Jeesh.

I think that any attempt to make decisions based on facts deserves, at least, respect. I would like to hear Governor Dean’s responses to some of the excellent comments from yesterday and today. Even if that means his campaign staff is reading and filtering for him.

1) As mentioned, I meant Joe Trippi, Dean campaign manager.
I misremembered his name.

2) Font - I’m just using standard “blockquote” and “em” tags, nothing I thought would be exotic. Looks like it’s a rendering bug. I don’t see it on my standard screen, but now I think I see what you’re talking about. The font wasn’t my intent (bad code!)

Jack Tanner wrote, “Let me be the first to suggest that national security and the threat of terrorism aren’t equivalent to needle exchange programs.”

Sorry Jack, you’re wrong. In either case, the wrong decision puts more people’s lives at risk. In the case of starting a war on Iraq, I believe that the W. administration chose the wrong path.

It is important to make sure that America is secure. It is important to stop terrorism worldwide. The actions that the United States took to nullify a perceived threat have actually made this nation less secure and have increased the likelihood that we will be targeted for terror attacks.

In choosing a preemptive stike, our government effectively told the world, “it is acceptable to attack someone because we feel they are a threat.” Now that it looks like one of the main pieces of evidence for that threat was fabricated, the threat seems even less substantial.

North Korea, Syria and Iran will have no problems identifying the threat posed by the United States. Does that in turn give them the right to attack us? By our own reasoning it does.

Had the United States strongly encouraged the UN to be more active or more strongly pursued a global, peaceful solution, we would not be as large a target for agression and terrorism as we are now.

While we shouldn’t pander to terrorists, neither should we cause their ranks to swell by provoking them unnecessarily. There were other options, our government chose the wrong one.

Some people here (e.g. the poster known as ‘me’) seem upset that Gov. Dean hasn’t used his time on this blog to TELL us enough.

I’m not upset at all. If I were Howard Dean, I would look at my time here as a chance to LISTEN and to educate myself about the issues that are regularly discussed here. It seems to me that is what he is doing; and I’m thankful for it. Should Dean go on to be elected President, I don’t think he or his staff will completely forget this week.

Let’s not worry that Dean isn’t TELLING us enough. Let’s use this time to express our opinions on these issues to Gov. Dean, and then let’s hope he gets elected.

The last time I checked, I didn’t see too many of the other candidates attempting to listen as closely as Gov. Dean appears to be…

I am not a Dean supporter nor a critic, simply a Democrat. But i have to defend his statement against some of the criticisms made here.
First, on the Dixie Chicks, Cumulus radio stations did decide to take them off the air as a matter of headquarters policy for all of their country stations. It is important because it is indicative of the power distributors of ideas and information have over those who have ideas and information. With greater ownership concentration, you get greater distortions in that power relationship.
Second, on the focus of his statement on broad issues. It is apporpriate and fair for Dean to raise issues of Bush credibility and focus on other larger issues. To expect him to focus on only what you know or care about indicates a simplistic understanding of the enormity of the task of running for President.
Again, I’m unemotional about whether or not Dean ends up the party’s nominee but cut the guy a little slack. He’s taking a risk and time out of his schedule to participate in this medium.
Thanks.

Dear Law Student,

In which history book did you read that “humanity benefits from” any empirialist effort whether it be called “America” or “Rome” ? And when it comes to operationalizing the concept of “freedom”, what criteria will you use to measure its validity and viability? Would you consider an individual “free” when his or her government tries to amass a case of treason against you built on disputable “facts” and intentional biases? (See Jane Mayer (3/10/03) Lost in the Jihad. The New Yorker) Would you deem an individual “free” when his or her government relies on questionable intelligence to embroider a case for defying standards of international law by striking another country pre-emptively in your name despite sober concerns regarding, not the least of which, the ethics, but also the pragmatics of such an aftermath? The point here is this: an ideology, say, of freedom, may set the stage for decisions, but the actual actions derived from choice are first subjected to prudent (some say, “rational”) assessments of probabilities, risk, consequences, losses and gains…not just by listening to those who tell you what you want to hear. In short, fellow student, choices or decisions shaped by ideology, alone, are often indistinguishable from impulsiveness…not to be confused with freedom…

“The Bush Doctrine clearly states that we will use preemptive force to deal with an imminent thread. “

If this really were true, N. Korea and Iran would have come first.

Why is National Security equated with attacking Iraq and walking around with a codpiece, while ignoring the security of our ports, bridges, nuclear facilities, chemical plants, etc.? Or equate it with creating strong international cooperation against terrortists, failed states, etc.? Or even making sure the government remains solvent, as opposed to a deficit approaching half a trillion dollars.

“Mission Accomplished” and “Bring ‘em on!” haven’t made the U.S. safer.

Just one more thought: I’ve always thought that campaign commercials should be the candidate talking to the camera about a position. Not meaningless voice-over drivel with footage of a candidate glad-handing. I think a commercial explaining your opposition to a *non-UN backed war*, and how your position has been shown to be justified, and what real “National Security” would be, would do a lot to sway the “unelectable liberal” meme. IMO.

“…I guess what I’m asking is how your words can amount to anything more than just another empty campaign promise? And yes, I’m being sincere…” Posted by Nick.

Gov. Dean, address the “empty campaign promise” issue head-on and you may well find yourself in the Oval Office. Clearly you are an innovator as shown by your active and effective use of technology. As an MD, you know a lack of innovation causes stagnation.

Is it possible for you to innovate further and move very select campaign promises from empty rhetoric to principled convictions you will take into the Presidency? Absolutely, if you choose to create a new path others may follow by continuing your efforts to innovate.

Irrespective of what one thinks of Newt Gingrich’s politics, his 1994 contract with America was brilliant. Even the leftist of liberals, if they embrace intellectual honesty, must admit the voting public was drawn to the idea of politicians holding themselves accountable by contract to a few principles if elected to office.

1994 proved at the polls that victory is more likely to be achieved if politicians voluntarily offer to hold themselves accountable by contract. Ask yourself, Gov. Dean, where is it written that the American people are limited in the number of social contracts under which we allow ourselves to be governed? Find that limitation and there is little to discuss. Understand this limit does not exist and you, sir, have much to discuss, debate and plan.

Consider, for a moment, one candidate promising the moon, business as usual, no principle in sight. The other candidate promising the moon, but adding a dash of principle by turning a few of those promises into contracted performance items and viola, an entirely new thought is in the mind of the voter when they punch that chad.

That new thought is, “finally, I can vote for a politician with principles.” It is quite simple, really. Given the outcome in 1994, who do you believe wins?

I too, am an innovator, Gov. Dean. I am the political theorist responsible for the first alpha test of contracted political performance in a 1989 special congressional election. That effort was the genesis of the 1994 beta.

You, Sir, have an opportunity to lead this great nation into the Responsibility Era, to borrow a phrase from President Bush. And in the process, answer Nick’s concern and the concerns of hundreds of thousands of other voters.

The white paper supporting this innovation is available on request. You have my email address.

ds:
Even so, is this opportunity to be used simply as another silly stump speech? Aren’t we to be regarded a little differently from the run of the mill nonsense that passes for content over at the Dean Blog?

You’d think some of these issues appeared to Dr Dean this week, as if from afar, based on his new found interest! I want more than glittering generalities here - I want substance on issues that are of concern. If I want the stump speech, I can go to howarddean.tv

Thanks,

Factotum

Hey “Me”

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed a commonality to all anonymous posts. To everyone like “me”, I hope you someday fell strong enough about your ideas to stand behind them personally.

If you read Dr. Dean’s post you will see him making an effort to learn. He does not have a full IP backgroud, nor does he have specific positions in the absence of factual information (thank goodness). If you demand that he be as knowledgable as you are on these matters, in order to support him, I challenge you to find another candidate who is. Until then, please assume the Prof. Lessig had a reason for inviting him, and out of respect, quit suggesting that his participation is a “major disservice”.

If you think reading his posts is doing you a “major disservice”, just chill for a week and check back when Lessig gets back from vacation.

If you feel like participating with Howard Dean, why don’t you try telling him what you think he should do about the IP problems of the day and see if that gets you somewhere. I’ve been surprised to see our ideas on the Dean Blog filter up to the highest level. Did you ever consider that he might be at the Lessig blog to find out what you think, not to give a sales pitch ?

I know it’s hard to believe that politicians can do anything else.

Hello, Dr. Dean!

I’m fiscally conservative, socially liberal. As such, I appreciate the themes of your campaign.

You’re right about Iraq (and seem to be more prophetic about the outcome every day). You’re right about conducting foreign affairs multilaterally, instead of in a “with us or agin’ us” vacuum of arrogance. You’re right about the economy (can’t wait to hear what you’re going to say about the latest deficit figures). You’re right about respecting the rights of all Americans (the Supreme Court stood behind you on that score—-twice). And besides that, you come across as being far more presidential than “W” ever will. In your first debate with Bush, you will remind America just how inarticulate, small-minded and evasive he really is. But, unlike Gore in 2000, I suspect you won’t let him get away with it for a moment. I can hear you now saying, “would you like some real Vermont maple syrup to go with that waffle?”

I’m with ya, Howard. I’ve donated 5 times already and intend to squeeze my finances more in the future. You’re it—-the real deal. Thank you for your tenacity and intelligence.

To answer a few things in turn…

#1 — Natalie Maines. I didn’t have a big opinion on her one way or another until after the controversy went over. What soured me on her was HER OWN conduct. She said something stupid. Then she “apologized” in a way that was very insincere and looked to be something more written by her copy staff than an actual apology. Then she ran around the country whining and moaning about how “hard” things had been on her when she had only been speaking her mind.

News flash for Ms. Maines. Freedom of Speech DOES mean you have the right to speak your mind. But it ALSO means that you have to take the responsibility and endure the consequences when other people don’t like what you have to say, or are rightfully pissed off when you insult someone they respect. A little humble pie would go a long way.

#2 — to Paul in SF… What can I say. Gov. Dean claims to be an educated man. He claims to be here to listen and learn. Well, there’s tons of information for him out there, and he can’t have been insulated from the debate if he’s as ‘net-savvy as he claims to be. So, if he has come to Lessig’s blog, and is speaking to Lessig’s readers, and hasn’t done his due diligence in looking up and figuring out where he stands on the issues we discuss here… then he isn’t worthy of being on this blog. If he hasn’t to this point, I’m asking him to do that due diligence at some time today and get back to us on it so that we have the information WE need to decide whether he deserves our vote. Is the candidate’s position on an issue, before deciding whether to give our vote, so much to ask?

#3 — Factotum… Right on! Couldn’t have put it much better myself. :) Giving lip service to listening, and actually listening, are two vastly different things. I’m hoping Gov. Dean will see that and give back to us some good responses.

#4 — To Bill - No, seriously. If Gov. Dean is to claim to be operating on facts, and yet put forth partisan rhetoric (such as claiming the recent action in Iraq was a new conflict), he’s already doing us a disservice. There’s no reason he has to try to say things that are more to the political left than his rivals, in fact, I’d much rather see a candidate who didn’t do that.

Hey Me -

For you to state that we didn’t just have a new war is to state a viewpoint that would authorize the president to attack Spain because Congress never repealed authorization for the Spanish American war over 100 years ago. (And, by the way, there advisors to this administration that proposed that viewpoint.)

In fact this *was* a new war — regardless of the symantic games you could play. In the eyes of most Americans, this was a new war.

Sending our armed forced in to destroy a country and kill 1000’s of people shouldn’t be taken so lightly. Putting an automatic weapon in the hands of a 20-year old and telling him or her to kill the ‘enemy’ is serious business.

Certainly there are times when it is needed. But to propose rational that deems it appropriate for a small group in the executive branch to make decisions to use massive military force — without requiring support in the congress and from the governed — flies in the face of the constitution of ths country.

Will you agree that this increases the liklihood that wars will be fought based on ideology and not facts?

Will you agree that this increases the liklihood that ‘facts’ will be devised to support decisions htat have already been made on ideological grounds?

Would you agree with these statements?

My support for Dean lies not in his stump speeches or weblog entries — though I recommned them as reading to those interested in learnig more about him. My support comes from his record in public service.

His record in public service demonstrates that basing government decisions on facts and making decisions consistent with the values of the governed leads to effective government and respect for the individual. Before you criticize this statement, I hope you’ll research it for yourself.

Dr. Dean,

First thank you for doing what I’ve come to find you always do, speak your mind. It’s refreshing to see someone basing his policy on fact, and when necessary (i’m a horrible speller) changing it. I am an avid Dean supporter, went to my first meet-up last month and enjoying being active talking to people to further your run to take our country back. But in doing this I’ve come across alot of Democrats who are very much Anti-Dean. I firmlly believe that right now, Dr., you are the only one with the message and the energy to win the White house back. My question is, eventually down the road, how do you plan on getting these anti-Deanocrats on board with you. Thanx for your time and go get ‘em Doc.

Drew

I think many of the posters have unrealistic expectations for Dr. Dean. I am glad he is admitting he does not know all the answers. Expecting him to understand all the intellectual property/ communications issues when a thousand other complicated issues matter to America is expecting too much. I wrote a paper in law school about the Eldred case, and it took months of research and reading, and help from friends. And that is just one of the many IP issues that matter to us. At least Dean understands the huge threat of reclassifying broadband as an information service. How many 1st Amendment scholars in America are up in arms about this, and they’re the supposed professionals? They’re still writing about street corner pamphleteers.
And Dean is a busy, busy man. If he can’t respond to every single post, it’s probably just because, like everyone, he needs some sleep.
For Dr. Dean, I have two questions and two comments.
Question 1: How do you propose we counter media deregulation? By keeping the internet channels free (e.g. by following many of Prof. Lessig’s suggestions in Future of Ideas), or by also reimposing media ownership limits? Are there any other reforms that are possible, like those suggested in Sunstein’s Democracy and Free Speech (a short chapter on broadcast has some good suggestions)?
Question 2: If you’re president, would Prof. Lessig be under consideration for being appointed FCC Chairman? Would Yale professor, Yochai Benkler (quoted all over Lessig’s last book, esp. on spectrum regulation, and a very important thinker for us all)?
Comment 1: Your website should not refer to you at every spot as “Gov. Howard Dean, M.D.” Everyone knows you’re a doctor, and the M.D. at the end (everywhere) could strike some as a little much. I’m not saying you play the “common guy on a ranch” role, but Americans don’t like titles.
Comment 2: Have someone in your staff prep you on Lessig’s Future of Ideas. If you’re here to learn, that’s a better place to start than a post from me.
Thanks for guest-blogging.

Glorfindel,

You may be content to have a politician “listen.” I, however, am not. Why not? Because they will listen, and listen, and listen, and then go off and not have learned a thing.

I want Gov. Dean to tell us his positions. That way, when we talk back, we know where he stands, and we can put together arguments that will point out where he is wrong, where he is right, and we can actually have a bit of dialogue here that might result in even changing his mind and getting him around to thinking the way we do on some of these issues.

But if we don’t know where he’s coming from first, that’s pretty hard to do. And I absolutely REFUSE to vote for a politician when I don’t know where he stands.

A-ha, Joe Trippi… of course. But poor ol’ Joe Teppi out there, I’ll bet he got a rush from seeing his name in bold large font like that.

As for Joe posting for Howard Dean, I highly doubt it. Having followed the Howard Dean campaign for awhile, I know that Howard is a sucker for reading every darned comment to his posts (few and far between on the official blog, but they do happen from time to time). It’s a horrible habit actually. But there you go.

Back on topic, as I see it, the big issue here is what on earth are we going to get out of Dean posting a message a day on the Lessig blog of all places… not to mention the fact that he doesn’t have time to comment on everyone’s questions?

I’ve seen Dean talk plainly when he has a formed opinion, whereas he researches and ponders when he doesn’t. I’d be willing to bet that Dean is using this week for the latter, as a research week. And maybe that sucks for you dedicated Lessig readers because this is YOUR space not some candidate’s observation deck. You come here to get information not be the sole giver. That’s not what Lessig brings to the table, and it’s not what you were expecting when Lessig said Dean would be guest-blogging.

Well, that’s the reality we’re looking at. And the spectrum of possible responses goes from educating Dean in a compelling way (heck, he’s listening, take advantage), all the way to bashing him because he’s not the IP expert we deserve in our next President. I obviously recommend the former, but if you want to let this chance pass you by, that’s a valid choice.

Re lobbyists — Their importance is as a source of funds for advertising based broadcast politics. If we invent a post-broadcast politics, where the metric changes from number of dollars to the number of small donors, then the lobbyists will only have influence if they represent a large number of donors — not just big corp. bucks.

So one solution to corporate lobbying is to change the game and the nature of what counts. I hope that is what we are doing.

It will be interesting to see just what all of the differences are between the old broadcast politics, driven by advertising aimed at passive consumers, and the new, emerging, politics of citizens as activley engaged producers of government and democracy.

Isn’t this in part what is at the heart of political blogging?

Jock
PS: Full disclosure - I am a part time consultant to Joe Trippi

Look, my eyes are glazing over just reading the last few minutes of postings.
And I have an extremely high tolerance for net-discussion. No presidential candidate is going to read through all the slush. It’s ludicrous.

In my prior post above, I miss typed my email address. The what paper mentioned above, The Responsibility Era, is available by emailing the address in this post.

Apologies for any confusion and my error.

Me, I guess I wasn’t being very clear. This is Dr. Lessig’s blog, right? The one about IP issues? I really don’t think it’s the place for stump speeches by Governor Dean or lobbying for him to represent your personal opinions and views.

I really didn’t get the sense that Governor Dean was here to “win” anybody’s vote. My take on it is that he’s here to dialog. I could be wrong about that. I hope I’m not and we see him respond to people’s posts on IP issues.

Governor Dean-

Thank you for taking the time to do something like this. The Iternet facet of your campaign, while increasingly overblown in the mainstream media, is still a fascinating leap into the future of American politics, and I commend your staff’s dedication to it. I have really only one question, and it has less to do with any individual stand of yours than it relates to an over-arching question about your campaign. How would you disagree with the dull roar that compares you to George McGovern? Is it possible for the “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” to appeal to the moderates in this country? I would like to think that it’s possible, but at the same time, I (like many other Democrats) have concerns about how a more progressive message will play nationwide. Of course, this reflects a cynicism that doesn’t really suit my 21 years, but I can’t help but be curious as to how you feel about these concerns, and whether or not you (in your heart of hearts) may share them. Thanks a lot for your time.

Governor Dean-

Thank you for taking the time to do something like this. The Internet facet of your campaign, while increasingly overblown in the mainstream media, is still a fascinating leap into the future of American politics, and I commend your staff’s dedication to it. I have really only one question, and it has less to do with any individual stand of yours than it relates to an over-arching question about your campaign. How would you disagree with the dull roar that compares you to George McGovern? Is it possible for the “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” to appeal to the moderates in this country? I would like to think that it’s possible, but at the same time, I (like many other Democrats) have concerns about how a more progressive message will play nationwide. Of course, this reflects a cynicism that doesn’t really suit my 21 years, but I can’t help but be curious as to how you feel about these concerns, and whether or not you (in your heart of hearts) may share them. Thanks a lot for your time.

OMG, the infamous Jock Gill rears his head here. Do you want us to vote for Dean? If you do, please stay over at Democrats.com and do whatever you do best - nothing.

Fightingdems,

To take each thing in turn:

Sending our armed forced in to destroy a country and kill 1000’s of people shouldn’t be taken so lightly. Putting an automatic weapon in the hands of a 20-year old and telling him or her to kill the ‘enemy’ is serious business.
I never said it wasn’t.

For you to state that we didn’t just have a new war is to state a viewpoint that would authorize the president to attack Spain because Congress never repealed authorization for the Spanish American war over 100 years ago.
Technically, that is true. And I do suppose that the best way to combat it would be a statute of limitations on declarations of war, wouldn’t it? Despite that, however, the situation with Spain is different in other ways. There was not ongoing tension with Spain. There was no cease-fire agreement that required certain concessions from Spain, or certain conduct.

Saddam had obligations in his end of the cease-fire. He didn’t live up to them. And that left the administration with a decision to make. To all the people who say “Well what about Iran or North Korea”… each situation is different. Get that through your heads. To treat N. Korea in the same manner as Iraq would be stupid. N. Korea’s leader may be power-hungry and manipulative, but he is not insane. With him, we can be very sure he is blustering, while with Saddam, we could not trust anything, but we could be sure that he would continue defying and dodging his cease-fire obligations any way he could find, in hopes of resuming his quest for power.

Will you agree that this increases the liklihood that wars will be fought based on ideology and not facts?
Not really, no. War is a horrid and terrible thing, whatever the reason, but there are times it is necessary. That Saddam Hussein dragged us to the point where the last resort was needed is lamentable, but far worse would have been having our leaders be too chicken to do what needed to be done.

And no, Iraq will not be rebuilt in a day. It’s going to take years. Hopefully when it’s done, the radical islamics will not be in power, will not be mistreating women and children, will not be going through their modern-day equivalent of the dark ages fighting between Catholics and Lutherans and Anglicans (oh my!), but you never know. It’s a religion in its developmental infancy that still relies on barbarism in many portions of the world to propagate itself. In Africa and the Middle East in particular, rather than raising people up, there are too many radical muslim clerics who would keep the people down, ignorant, and superstitious so as to keep them in line.

My fervent hope is that Iraq can be turned into a model of better Islam that actually follows the ideals that Muslims in America claim to hold, rather than some outdated stuff that passed down from some guy claiming to be a prophet. But we have to be willing to stand firm on that. Since the war is over, instead of whining and moaning and complaining about how Bush is illegitimate, or didn’t have the right to do what he did, why not rejoice at the fact that Saddam’s torturous prisons are gone, there will be no more mass graves, and work towards making Iraq into something truly good in the world?

Hello!

I’d like to preface this with the fact that I am a Dean Supporter. However, I have a lay interest in IP and have seen Professor Lessig speak in person on this issue becuase of his work on the Eldred case. I think I’ve even posted to this blog before…I didn’t know what a blog was until I heard Professor Lessig mention it in his talk.

All of this IP stuff seems very far removed from people like me. Can you tell us your personal stories or stories from around the world how current IP laws and practices in the US hard affecting you? The one I know of from Professor Lessig is the impact on preventing cheap drugs to treat AIDS in Africa.

xoxoxox
Solaria

support free speech by playing “Soldier On” by Confidence Man - a great thinking person’s approach to patriotism
Lyrics:
Your attention please!
The dogs of war are off the leash,
the bombs all have our names
and I don’t understand
why it’s this bad man.
There are so goddamn
many of them.
The cowboy king has drawn
his line in the sand.

If I get a gun and kill
another human, will I
go to heaven,
will I be American?

Better pin a flag on,
sticker for the wagon.
Pride is never dragging
cause I am American.

But it’s American to question
any goddamn thing I please.
And I don’t like your suggestion
that I follow your decrees.

Have you ever seen an eagle
wheeling high above the pines
to land upon a windswept rock?
It’s so terrible and regal.
What I want to point out is
it sits alone.
It does not flock.

http://artists.mp3s.com/artist_song/3204/3204233.html or
http://www.garageband.com/artist/confidenceman
or click on my name

Governor Dean,

I’m very glad to have you here, and I hope that you discuss intellectual property and technology issues with Professor Lessig.

I’d also like to suggest discussing them with Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) who seems to me one of the most clued in legislators on IP and technological issues. He sponsored legislation that would fix key problems with the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, and he also sponsored the Digital Media Consumers’ Rights Act, which tried to reaffirm ‘fair use’ rights as well as ensuring proper labeling of copy-protected CDs.

K Jeff, that’s just kind of silly… do you really need to try to pimp your music in the middle of a debate?

OK, everyone take a deep breath - I imagine every one of you here is a LOT smarter than Governor Dean on IP (I just figured out what that means, so you are DEFINITELY a lot smarter than me, too) issues.

You are all uber geeks. And I use that term endearingly since it comes from someone who has a background in geophysics and programs computers for a living - extremely geeky.

Now that you are all admitted experts, realize you have the attention of a presidential candidate and he is asking for some facts on issues you care about and your ideas and opinions. When was the last time George Bush (or anyone in his government) asked for your opinion on anything?

Each one of you has an opportunity to shape the thinking of an individual who does not know that much on a topic you care about. Howard Dean is probably not going to respond to each post (or limited posts) and he is probably not going to lead the discussion on the finer points of copyright law.

I think what the Governor and the Lessig are looking for is for all of YOU to direct the conversation for a week. You tell the host what you want to talk about this week. The Governor will lay out broad themes - media conglomeration yesterday and today we are talking about using facts to make decisions that affect all of us.

just testing:

<em>

<blockquote>

<p>

<blockquote><em>

Seth, I’m unable to rperoduce your font bug- what specific tag or pair of tags did you use?

Aziz: Actually I think you did reproduce the font bug.

Carlton:

So, in fact, this is an online “listening tour?” I think I may sit this one out and tune back in next week when we can get more than a campaign commercial. I say this as a Dean supporter - this is a waste of all our time - Dean’s primarily. I actually feel that if has nothing to add hee - this is actually counter-productive, as it will suggest a lack of depth. IMHO.

woah - answered my own question. The HTML is formatted correctly in the Preview but when it is posted, both b and strong get inflated in size. looks like a formatting bug in Moveable Type or the specific template that Lessig is using.

“Facts are a better basis for decisions than ideology.”

Here are a few facts about our current copyright/IP system that I hope will guide your thinking on the issues.

* Nothing — except a few older works that were specifically re-copyrighted for short times by the Bono act — will enter the public domain again in this country until at least 2019. Nothing.

* The anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA has damaged our capacity for research and innovation — ask Ed Felten or Dmitri Sklyarov how much.

* It also makes it illegal for me to play a DVD that I own on my home computer, which runs Linux, and for which there is no authorized DVD player available. Why is it legal for me to watch a DVD in my livingroom, but not in my office?

* Software patents endanger innovation. According to people who are much smarter and more informed than I am, nearly every non-trivial software program violates someone’s patent; we have just been lucky, so far, that not many companies have chosen to enforce the patents that they own.

JP

I didn’t even use “b”
I just had “blockquote” “em” text “/em” “/blockquote”

Hi Dean,

I’m a strong supporter of yours who has donated 4 times so far. That said, while some posters above are over-reacting, I do think that we’re all hoping for a little more than standard campaign material from you. I’d rather see some thoughtful opinions from Dean, the person - not Dean, the campaign. If this audience respects you, we’ll go to your site - outright campaigning (leading into Iraq with IP? Posting links to a petition?) here will turn us off.

Constructive criticism. I want everyone to see the real person behind the campaign. That’s what made me support you. You’ve got a very targeted audience here - no need for public speeches.

-j

Perhaps the Governor’s critics could enlighten us with who they are inclined to support in the primaries (if Democrats), and in the GE. Perhaps, also provide an explanation of which particular positions (of that candidate) are attractive in this context (IP) and elsewhere.

This might shed some perspective on what has become a rather nasty bout of criticism. I think many Dean supporters, and also, possibly, the campaign staff, are rather surprised by the response, and could use an education on what is expected from us, and who our competition (in politics) is.

That said, I personally feel that the strongest critics here are being unfair and unreasonable. Howard is an M.D. and a governor. He does not have a background in IP law, general law, cyber-issues, or technology. He is open-minded, and that’s about all he can bring to the table. His position on IP comes only from his personal experience and the issues he sees as a candidate with a vested interest in freedom of speech on the Internet. This is an opportunity for you folks to educate him, his staff, and his supporters. Don’t squander it with mean spirited diatribe. You won’t get this opportunity with GW.

Ian

> -The Law Student

This is an absurd and treacherous statement.

Good points, JHP. Here’s a few more:

* Disney has made their money on a systematic rape of the public domain. Hercules, Snow White, Aladdin to name just a few. Now, when the time has come that their own works ought to enter the public domain so that other authors might produce new works and enhance art and science based on what Disney has put out, Disney suddenly finds that the public domain isn’t so great. Doesn’t this in itself make you very worried that Copyright has suddenly become infinitely extensible and that no new works may EVER enter the public domain again, and we need to wait until 2019 just to find out if any ever will?

* The DMCA and its prohibitions on reverse engineering, on their face, are laughable. Where does the difference lie between someone tinkering with their car, or their toaster, and someone messing around with software they have bought?

When did our ability to legally tinker with, repair, improve, or otherwise mess with something we have bought go away, and why? I submit that about the only right any producer should have, if we do something they didn’t intend with a product we bought, is to take away our warranty and (perhaps) have some immunity from lawsuit in the case of someone injuring themself by doing something really, really stupid.

I know, these are idealogical questions, but they are logical in nature. When laws intended to protect copyright are used instead so that companies can shut the competition out of printer cartridge making, or even worse the car companies try to use it to force everyone to come back to the dealership for servicing (putting the independent auto mechanic out of business) the law is very bad and needs fixing desperately.

Doctoral Candidate says: “In which history book did you read that “humanity benefits from” any empirialist effort whether it be called “America” or “Rome”

With all do respect, are you seriously arguing that America hasn’t benefitted humanity? Are you arguing that the great life that America has given it’s 1/3 of a billion inhabitants is a bad thing? Are you suggesting the hope and reality of liberty that America continually reasserts is wicked? As the kids in jail in Iraq if American Imperialism is evil. Ask the women of Afghanistan who for the first time are able to attend school and dress like they want to if American Imperialism benefits humanity. Ask the liberals in Iran who know their only salvation from tyranny lies in American liberation about the wickedness of American imperialism. The benefit to humanity of American Imperialism is breathtaking and should be continually celebrated.

Would you consider an individual “free” when his or her government tries to amass a case of treason against you built on disputable “facts” and intentional biases?

An individual is free, and remains free. That the government tells him something doesn’t take away from his inborn freedom. In fact from the very beginning government has always and only existed to take away man’s liberty. You want “Treason” why not read the book by Ann Coulter of that name about who are the treasonous scum. And by the way on the subject of government; all the powerful were against the war. Despite that in San Francisco 15 % were against the fight against Nazi Renaissance (“Ba’athism”) The city council, the media, everyone with power tried to stuff the lie down America’s face that San Franciscans were anti-war with Lies, Lies, Lies; the idea that there was a groundswell of anti-war feeling in S.F. was Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies.

The point here is this: an ideology, say, of freedom, may set the stage for decisions,

Freedom is not an ideology, it is the natural state of all people. it is only leftist ideologies that subtract from man’s natural state of being free. The ideology I speak of the imperitive of making all men recognize their own freedom (by minimizing the government sector whereever possible, by encouraging private control of important factors in society - like schools, essential services and the media)

egarding DMCA chilling effects, people might be interested in my
Library Of Congress DMCA testimony
http://sethf.com/anticensorware/hearing_dc.php
Forgive me the commercial, it’s actually good reading, and pretty funny in places (there’s a great part at the end where the censorware company representative gets compared - not by me - to the Iraqi Information Minister)

But a presidential candidate is NOT asking my/our opinions here. If he wants an
education on IP issues, ploughing through blog blather is not the way to do it!
Reading Lessig’s books would work.

This is buzz, where you’re supposed to connect with the candidate, and feel he or she really cares about you, yes, you. I’m less than overwhelmed.

I also think that if this is to be productive - perhaps Gov. Dean could ask some questions he needs answers to. Otherwise this is just another Hillary “listening tour.” Engage, don’t propagandize. I am a Dean supporter and I find this tedious and unsettling.

I have one simple question. If you become President, would you be willing to have a daily or weekly blog on the white house website? Perhaps even a blog for every member of your staff?

Thanks,
Your Supporter in Wilmington NC
Roey

Perhaps it is just a listening tour, I don’t know. A conversation involves a response from the listener that he or she heard and understood what the speaker had to say. I certainly hope he takes time to make a few posts, even just to say “I don’t agree with you”.

No matter what the Governor seems to be, it doesn’t appear to be enough for a handful of people. I understand a number of your individuals’ frustration at the fact that the Governor has been somewhat vague - but it more appeared to me that Dr. Dean was outlining a general policy of honesty and straighfordwardness than providing any specifics at this point in time. Providing specifics is all well and good - but no one is going to have the answer to every specific issue all the time. I think the Governor has attempted to convey that in a lot of what he says - and I respect that. There is nothing more encouraging (and weren’t we all taught this in grade school) - and nothing more courageous - than someone who stands up and says “I don’t know - but I’m willing to listen to other opinions.”

A number of you posted “Needle sharing isn’t exactly the same as the war in Iraq”. I don’t think that’s the point that the Governor was trying to make - he was merely saying that sometimes empirical evidence can help one change their opinion. And yes, there is no doubt that ideology can help form initial opinions. I think the overarching point of the argument was merely that, if used properly, empirical evidence is a wonderful way to help change people’s specific beliefs, regardless of ideology.

Christians may have once been convinced that the world was flat (and their ideology helped fuel this argument), but once they were faced with insurmountable empirical evidence to the contrary, this issue all but dissapeared.

I think that’s the point - someone who admits they are open to change based on differing opinions - how refreshing when compared to today’s administration, which refuses to acknowledge any evidence to the contrary of their own personal ideologies. Now that’s America.

“This is buzz, where you’re supposed to connect with the candidate, and feel he or she really cares about you, yes, you. I’m less than overwhelmed” - from Seth’s post

Seth: I think it was Prof. Lessig who invited Dean to come, not the other way around. If this is merely buzz, then it’s buzz instigated by Lessig, who wrote that he was the one who “arranged” Dean’s guest-blogging appearance.

I posted this on the official blog in response to Factotum. Since I’m a reader of this site as well, I figured I ought to cross-post it.

Factotum:

I am incredibly tuned-into copyright law issues. I’m probably more informed than 99.9% of all Americans on those issues. I almost wept when the Supreme Court announced the Eldred decision.

I am also a Dean supporter.

And I, quite frankly, don’t really care what his position on copyright and patents are. It would be nice if he agreed with me, but after seeing what Bush has done to this country in the last 2 years, I have my priorities right: Bush out, then copyright reform.

You ask: “did [Dean] just not listen to people about these issues that are SO important to us there?”

He probably didn’t hear much about it. I’ve seen him twice, and I didn’t raise the issue. Single-issue copyright voters must be the smallest bloc of voters in existence.

Dean is posting on Lessig’s blog to find out what you’ve got to say. He’s already proven that he can be swayed by facts (honestly, one of the most refreshing things about him). Why don’t you provide some facts?

I read a lot of complaining over there, but not a lot of passionate defenses of the benefits of the Eldred Act.

I know why I should care about the Eldred Act. But the average voter, or politician? Explain it to us like a three year old.

…Next Post, after Factotum posted a link to the Eldred Act FAQ…

Linking to a FAQ ain’t gonna cut it, Factotum.

To paraphrase my former governor, “I ain’t got time to read”.

Spell it out for us. Maybe three points. What are the harms of the current copyright system? What does the Eldred Act fix? What will its effect be? And why should I, as a normal American consumer of information, care?

Dr. Dean,
How do you feel about having the government and military use free open source Linux software on their servers (its still a little to difficult for most desktop users). Since Linux is free would save millions every year, plus its much more stable and has a lower risk of security breach. This issue has been brought up before by Ralph Nader and James Love:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2002/06/04/microsoft-nader.htm

To find out more check out the Consumer Project on Technology by clicking my name below.

Jason -

I completely agree - but without prior knowledge of the man it just looks like campaigning to some here. The vibe I get is that people were assuming that his posts would be more of an informal nature.

Regardless, I think it’s great that he’s taking part in things like this. Don’t take this as discouragement, Dr. D.

-j

General observation: This comment board has one of the highest ratios of noise to signal of any Net forum I’ve seen in a while. (It’s worse than Slashdot!)

For this dialogue to accomplish anything, for us readers/posters or for Dean, it needs a lot less name-calling and self-promotion.

Gov. Dean,
Recently Condoleeza Rice has said that the questions about the Iraq-Niger connection have been “enourmously overblown”. It seems to me that if the issue has really been overblown then the administration should be asking for a full and non-partisan investigation.

In light of all of this I have a suggestion for a policy of the future Dean Administration. If any one in your administration refers to an issue as ‘overblown’, then your policy will be to ask Congress for an immediate investigation. Afterall, if an issue is truely being overblown in the media, then it would be in your best interest to get all the facts out so people could know the truth.

Howard Dean, and Matt & Zephyr & Nicco —

The Larry Lessig Deanblog is one of the most inspired ideas, and inspiring moments, of the Campaign so far. Congratulations, you guys. I just posted the following about it on The WELL — to politics 1981: Howard Dean in ‘04 #886 —

—oOo—

Aaaand I am really happy to note the typo, in the above [Dean’s July 15 post] : “he” says, “intellectual property, healthy [sic] care, the environment”…

Geez. You mean this actually might really and sincerely be Howard Dean, writing this… the candidate hisself… not some campaign committee or hired publicist or intervening mediatrics mediator but The Candidate!, hisself… him, not “him”…

If so, this would be just about the first time in my own personal memory since the oh-so-mediagenic Kennedy Campaign — long time ago. Ever since then, you’d never have seen a “typo”; never have seen anything not thoroughly vetted by a PR consultants’ committee, in fact.

So now here comes Howard Dean, with his own honest opinions and his own typos and all… Hate to say this, folks, but this gives me one more good reason to vote for this guy — I know substance matters more, but I agree with him there too, and the way you do things sometimes counts for a lot as well.

‘Course now someone is going to say that Carville or Trippi or
somebody else stuck the typo in there to make this “sound genuine”… call me a cynic…

—oOo—

— now don’t any of _you_ at the Campaign come and tell us that the “typo” was in fact a PR setup… leave us our illusions — we like the guy…

Inspired Campaign tactic, like I said, and inspiring too. The cynicism which has pervaded campaigning since the 1960s needs to be fought hard, and so far you folks are doing this well — your “Internet leveraging” in getting the Meetups to write those Iowa letters, and now this Larry Lessig Deanblog — on behalf of all of us.

Jer - Fair enough.

But the man still is campaigning for president. Part of the pragmatist in me says that no matter what, that’ll still always be in the back of his mind. ;) I’m sure he’s still approaching issues with the thought ‘is this going to help or hurt my campaign?’

Is that necessarily ‘evil’? Of course not. You’d have to be stupid to ignore that fact if you were running for president. ;) That said, it would of course be nice if things were approached on an issue-by-issue basis, but I simply don’t think the Doctor’s got enough time to, as one previous poster said, pander to every single interest group (be it single-issue copyright voters to advocates of open-source operating systems on Navy computers).

Are there different standards for war than for “preemptive” war? Where do the (differing?) standards come from? Are they “facts”?

Dean has revealed that while he’s better educated than the current president, he’s no smarter.

I can go and copy and paste three points from the FAQ -so what? Does that mean I am more knowledgeable than you? Nope - I never claimed to be.

My point in my posts was to engage the Gov. in this discussion, rather than turning it into another campaign email. I think you missed the point of my postings.

I actually WANT Dean to win - I think that by not confronting him to be more engaged with people - especially when he has the opportunity to do so in a forum like this - is simply missing opportunities and engaging in “politics as usual.”

My mistake was in posting over at the BfA. If that’s your point - I’ll concede it. I will not be able to respond again until later this evening - so don’t take my absence as defeat! heh.

‘In either case, the wrong decision puts more people’s lives at risk. In the case of starting a war on Iraq, I believe that the W. administration chose the wrong path.

It is important to make sure that America is secure. It is important to stop terrorism worldwide. The actions that the United States took to nullify a perceived threat have actually made this nation less secure and have increased the likelihood that we will be targeted for terror attacks.’

Sorry Maryann but you miss my point and you’re completely lacking perspective. You may be right that the actions were wrong in invading Iraq but if Dean equates national security which directly effects each and every American and indirectly the rest of the world with limited scope issues such as needle exchange programs or parental consent notifications then he’s going to show himself as a fringe candidate. I’m not judging his support or views on these issues but if he wants to get elected he better be able to show the public that he knows what’s important and what’s not. He may very well feel as you apparently do that these issues are equivalent but he’s going to get beat like a drum if that’s how he campaigns.

Heather:

There’s nothing particularly wrong with a politician trying to generate “buzz”. It’s not a high crime or misdemeanor. And I should also say that, while I’m currently undecided, Dean sounds like a good guy to me. However, just in terms of my personal idiosyncrasies, I find many of the standard political hypocrisies tend to grate on me.

My understanding is that policy gets made first by the candidate’s own convictions, then by the full-time staffers, then from various advisors. And Lessig would be excellent in the role of those advisors.

However, positions are NOT made out of blogorrhea. They can’t be. There’s not enough time, the overall signal is too low, there’s no consideration for ugly imperatives, etc.

I’ve been frustrated enough in my life over, e.g. trying to get people to listen to my work on censorware, that it’s unpleasant to be subjected to a rally in the guise of a consultation.

Again, not the worst thing in the world. But it’s annoying enough to move me to comment.

Governor and Dr. Dean:

When the time comes for you to make your FCC appointments, I would ask that you consider the following:

Radio astronomy, and astronomy in other bands of the electromagnetic spectrum, are essential tools by which scientists and engineers comb the physical universe for basic information regarding our existence, and the potential for the existence of other life beyond our humble planet.

Electromagnetic frequency bandwidth allocations devoted to scientific research are being eroded away as bandwidth is increasingly devoted to terrestrial communications.

I would ask you to extend your interest in environmental conservation by cultivating a view of the electromagnetic spectrum as a natural resource.

Just as it is important for the preservation of wildlife and the human psyche to reduce the amount of light pollution in the sky that prevents us from connecting with the visible stars, it is important to safeguard precious windows of bandwidth necessary for scientific exploration of the sky.

Before make any appointments to the FCC, please consult with the International Astronomical Union’s Working Groups on Astrophysically Important Spectral Lines and Interference Mitigation.

Information regarding the IAU division on Radio Astronomy can be found at the following URL:

http://www.ira.bo.cnr.it/IAU_Com40/index.html

I would be happy to hook you up with two excellent radio astronomers at the University of Iowa, some time when you are in Iowa City, who could discuss such issues with you and arrange for you to tour National Radio Astronomy Observatory facilities, such as the VLA (Very Large Array) in Socorro, New Mexico, if you are desirous and your campaign schedule would permit it.

Respectfully submitted,
Dawn M. Mueller
Iowa City, IA
dmueller@eoswind.com

It’s got to be by Dean himself, because he doesn’t seem to know how to use the Categories feature in MT, even though his staffers do.

Factotum,

I simply want to move this discussion in a positive direction. I see a lot of people complaining here, but not a lot of explaining.

I think JHP did a good job of listing reasons to support the Eldred Act. Let’s see a few more!

Jack — the Governor is well known for his typos — he seldom gets through a post or comment without making one.

Seth and others who make many valid critisims here — all I can say is that Howard Dean is new to blogging — and what we are doing here is the first time we (including me who has been an avid blog reader for the better part of a few years) have done something like this. We ain’t gonna get it right — I don’t even know if its possible for a candidate, even one attempting to get it right — to get it right.

I don’t want to open this thread up to suggestions about it — But I have included a real email to me — and I would really appreciate those who can take the time to drop me an email with suggestions or contructive critisim on how we can do better. This may be our first real leap into the blogosphere beyond our own blog — but I assure you it will not be our last.

Joe Trippi
campaign manager
Dean for America

First, I’ll address other posters, and then I’ll address you, Dr. Dean.

To the other posters:

Having free time on a political campaign is an oxymoron. I also believe that this is genuinely Dr. Dean. He writes like he speaks, as most people who are not writers do. I know from experience that when he realizes that he does not know the answer to something, he looks for it. That’s what I believe motivated him to come here. If I were running for President and didn’t know the first thing about copyright law, I’d be thrilled to find a place like this to blog.

My point is, to put it simply, that Dean is a n00b. I think he’s citing the Dixie Chicks because they’re what got picked up on the national radar. Vermont is not Kansas. It’s much easier to find an audience for liberal views. I liken it to my discovering punk music a few years back, thanks to Green Day. They weren’t really punk in the same sense that the Dixie Chicks weren’t really being hurt by their squelching.

I think that as time progresses, Dr. Dean will actually become informed on this issue, especially as he’s in contact with Lessig.

———-

To Dr. Dean:

I’m don’t claim to be an expert on the minutiae of copyright law, but it’s been my experience that the greatest threat to a free press in this country is not simply deregulation, but a lethal cocktail of deregulation, legal citizenship, and eternal life for corporations. I do not simply have a “profound fear and mistrust of multinational corporations;” my misgivings are rooted in centuries of fact.

In Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, argued January 26-29, 1886, Chief Justice Waite made the headnote comments that corporations were persons. Headnotes, of course, are not legally binding. However, lesser courts treated them as such, and since that time, a legal precedent has been established allowing corporations to enjoy the same rights as natural citizens. They gained these full rights more than a half-century before the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What this means is that corporations, economic institutions created by citizens, are subsequently given the power of citizens. With the revocation of corporate charters, this gives them eternal life.

So we have an entity that has more money than the average citizen, is entitled to the rights of the average citizen, and is essentially allowed to live forever, provided it is not squelched by competition.

I believe that, like government, corporations should be the servant of the people, and not their master. I am not so disillusioned to believe that government is not in the dominion of the people. It threatens to be, with the Bush admministration threatening the very fabric of our Republic, but it is not yet.

This is why I suspect you are now running, having read the text of your announcement speech.

But I digress. Returning to my main line, corporations are no longer the servant of their masters. These companies can oust all of their founders and continue on, ad infinitum. The corporate entity cares only for increasing its profits and attracting more shareholders. Most corporate citizens flagrantly violate basic human rights in countries around the globe. And the corporate media threaten to squelch not only the public domain, but public opinion.

Leading up to the war in Iraq, the general population was fairly evenly divided on whether or not the United States should go to war. The Bush administration, however, utilized corporate allies to engineer public opinion, thanks to the marketing genius of the Bush team. The American public in general was duped, and the statements of the Bush administration were given priority over the outcry of the people—including tens of millions of protesters on Feb. 15, 2003.

Having first dealt with the media in Chicago on that day, and in a few instances afterward, one of them being at the Iowa City Meetup earlier this month, I know that individual reporters have quite a bit of journalistic integrity. However, they are required to write in a manner mandated by the corporations that put food on their table. Beyond that, the editorial board is required to alter these articles and broadcasts so as to engineer profit—hence, we have sensationalism and spin. In a system where a few corporations are allowed to perpetually chase higher profits, we have more sensationalism, and we are gripped by fear as a result.

Therefore, I feel that it is essential, not only to fairness, but to the Bill of Rights itself, that corporations be given term limits in their charters and be legally stripped of personhood. The problem extends much further than the suppression of the freedom of the press, of assembly, or of speech; it extends to the most fundamental rights of the human race, those inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This assertion is not some simple pronouncement; it is rooted in fact.

The fact is, probably every piece of clothing you’re wearing was in a sweatshop at some point, where people are forced to work 12-16 hour days, often without bathroom breaks, for a paltry $2 a day. This is only one example, and I would go into others, but I’ll leave that to you. Other industries to observe include fast food, toys, and food in general, bananas in particular. This does not simply happen with U.S. run, multinational corporations benefited by free trade; it happens within U.S. territories as well, Saipan being the example. There are sweatshops all over Saipan. They’re where the clothes that say “Made in the U.S.A” come from. In an aside that’ll make your blood boil, Tom DeLay visited these sweatshops, and said he supported what they were doing. Tom DeLay is of course the Texas representative responsible for starting the redistricting chaos in Texas.

I wish ending corruption was as simple as going back to media regulation. But it’s not.

I also realize that my own words and case are not the most elegantly written, but I hope they encourage you to really look and listen to what has gone on in the world we don’t generally hear about on TV or talk radio.

~Eddie

“One of the amazing things about this campaign is how the Internet has allowed people to meet and work together in common cause. Only by taking an active part in our democracy will we be able to restore a government of, by and for the people.”

I’d like to take a stab at defending this Deanstatement, as being more than the usual vacuous political campaign blather which some here accuse it of.

Think about the last election: Bush won that with less than half of the vote — 48%, of the mere 51.3% who registered — and we had that Florida mess, and now a clumsy and extremist President who was “selected not elected” by our Supreme Court…

So we got political problems, people: fundamental ones — low voter turnout, ballot-splitting, apathy and cynicism and extremists… I won’t say this is the worst crisis in Our Democracy, but it must rank as one of them. So Dean speaks ‘sooth here, I think: not vapid generalities, in saying what he says above, but the actual campaign issues.

We do have very real problems, now, with “active part” and “democracy” and “government of, by and for the people”, as Dean says — more in this election than we have had for some time. The last election I myself remember which came this close on these matters was Nixon’s, and that — those — were a whole lot less constitutionally controversial.

So Our Democracy really is at issue, this time around, and Dean is addressing Our Democracy. The other issues are important as well, but we need a candidate with a clear and steady focus on the biggest issue, too: if we don’t have a functioning democracy, going forward — or if the one we have continues to erode — it will be a lot harder to get the other things done, as well.

I’m personally a fan of his Internet-approach — particularly now that his campaign has figured out how to “leverage” that with postal letter-writing, too. My most general hope is that the technology just might give all of us a hand with our general Democracy problems now, as well.

Dear Governor Dean,

I wish to give some constructive criticism, namely regarding your use of the term “Intellectual Property”. I will quote from the Free Software Foundation’s page on the term:

““Intellectual property” is also an unwise generalization. The term is a catch-all that lumps together several disparate legal systems, including copyright, patents, trademarks, and others, which have very little in common. These systems of law originated separately, cover different activities, operate in different ways, and raise different public policy issues. If you learn a fact about copyright law, you would do well to assume it does not apply to patent law, since that is almost always so.”

Source: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty

I have always found the term to be misleading my self, since copyrights and patents are given for limited times, which is of course not true for property in the traditional sense. Good luck with your campaign!

Best regards,
Jaap Vermeulen

Gov. Dean,

“I opposed needle exchanges for drug addicts until I saw the empirical evidence that showed how such exchanges reduce the spread of disease.”

It almost sounds like you’re against the drug war, but we know you’re not. If you want the green and libertarian votes you’re going to have to come out against the insanity of this drug war in a real way, needle exchange is a nothing issue.

Its good that you want facts, you can find some here. Stop the drug war and you can take off about 10 billion per year from government spending. Use some of the savings to retrain cops as teachers. That, or move the displaced law enforcement to homeland security.

Just to be clear, there is no question that drugs are unhealthy. The anti-drug ads should continue (along with the anti-smoking and anti-drinking ads). I think that decriminalization on the federal level and repealing the mandatory minimums is the right thing. Let the states work out thier own policies on this issue. Let people be free to make the choice to hurt themselves. Government’s place is to discourage self-abuse, not to create a gulag jobs program of it.

Perhaps Prof. Lessig invited Dr. Dean to guest-blog in hopes of getting a bunch of uniformed Dean supporters (like me) over to his site to educate us on IP issues, copywrite laws, etc. I know close to nothing about these issues but now, thanks to this blog and the regular Lessig bloggers, I’m very interested in and concerned about them. If Dr. Dean wasn’t guest-blogging here, I wouldn’t be here either. I’m grateful he led me here because these are important issues & I need to learn more about them. I can understand that this is probably not very thrilling to those of you who come here regularly for challenging & informative discussions, but I hope your suffering will be rewarded by increased interest in & visibility of the issues that matter to you.

Law Student asks: “With all do respect, are you seriously arguing that America hasn’t benefited humanity?”

My question read: in which history book did you read that humanity benefits from any imperialist effort whether it be called America or Rome? Your response ignores the subject of that sentence (ie. imperialism). Hmm…I wonder why…

Law Student states: “Freedom is not an ideology, it is the natural state of all people. It is only the leftist ideologies that subtract from man’s natural state of being free”

Hobbes and Kant will be so relieved to hear you’ve resolved their great debate! And your noble assertion that “an individual is free and remains free. That the government tells him something doesn’t take away his inborn freedom…” Tell that to the folks in Guantanomo Bay…

Wish I could linger but I’ve got an exam to study for. Don’t you? If not, why not? >

I found Seth Finkelstein’s early comment about some staffer reading the comments to be correct. It’s unlikely Dean will read each and every comment posted to this blog this week (when Dean is guest hosting). Having staffers read and digest commentary from the public is quite common.

Finally, I’m glad to see Dean is interested in learning, and I hope he takes the time to do this by reading some of the deeply-considered views on copyright, patents on algorithms used in software, and software freedom from the GNU project. Dean says, “I know that people here care deeply about intellectual property.”—actually people here are more likely to have read this brief blurb which encourages us to think of copyright, trademark, patent, and other areas of law separately. These laws cover different things, last for different amounts of time, are acquired differently, and raise different social concerns. Two areas commonly discussed under the misleading term “intellectual property” can actually contradict one another: patents and copyrights—the power you gain under U.S. copyright law to distribute a homemade MP3 encoder/decoder is trumped by Thomson’s MP3 patent. Thus there is no genuine Free Software MP3 player in the U.S. (and other countries that honor patents on algorithms used in the creation of software—so-called “software patents”). Briefly, on software patents, I’m sure Dean (being a medical doctor) can imagine the harm that would come if surgical techniques were patentable (“I’m sorry, I can’t give you that desperately needed operation until you obtain a license for the patent from ConHugeCo Medical, Inc.). Similar harm (writ small, life and death matters are not the norm) exists in software patents; only the largest software firms can afford to experiment and share implementations because they are likely to have the patent (or a license to the patent) covering their implementation. In my experience, patents harm incremental development (such as software development) for the benefit of a few large firms (including IBM, HP, Apple, and Microsoft). Listen or read Richard Stallman’s speech on this topic, it is quite instructive.

I encourage Dean to support the Eldred Act and help us fight software patents (in the U.S. and abroad).

Just realized I wrote copywrite instead of copyright… I’m an idiot…

Thank you Dr. Dean for running for President. I am a 32 year old American who has never voted. But the current state of affairs stemming from the Bush MisAdministration has me interested in politics, finally. So I’m taking your advice and getting involved because together we really can take back our country. I look forward to seeing you in San Diego again. Good job at the HRC, btw.

Go Dean! :)

Joe Trippi:

The email address from the comment-posting form isn’t included in the posted comment if you also enter a URL.

So, I’ll make my suggestion here: ask the Gov. to pick two or three specific copyright or IP or FCC-related issues that commenters have brought up here and respond to them — whether that means stating a definite position, explaining why he hasn’t made up his mind, talking about the advice he’s hearing from advisors and others about the issue, whatever is appropriate. Most importantly, in each case, give a specific answer to a specific question, honestly and without spin.

>As a doctor, I?m trained to base my decisions on facts.
*This* is why I’m voting for you. :-)

The fact is that the balance between copyright (intended to provide an economic incentive for authors to create new works) and the public domain (where all of knowledge, science and the arts, must eventually end up in order to be of lasting benefit to society) has fallen way, way out of whack. The economic analyses given as friend of the court briefs in Eldred v. Ashcroft and Golan v. Ashcroft (and in the dissenting opinion to the first case by Justice Breyer show that the economic incentive is essentially at its theoretical maximum. Other evidence shows that the economic benefit is mainly being reaped by rent-seeking corporations, rather than the authors whom the incentives were meant to go to. Other friend-of-the-court briefs show the severe practical impact, in that economically unviable works — but works with literary or scientific value — are simply vanishing, since they are not in the public domain, and it is too expensive to track down the copyright holders and obtain rights.

The Eldred Act is the smallest possible step towards redressing this balance. It’s a good step, but a minimum one.

On software patents: the vast majority of so-called software patents are for algorithms which are (a) obvious, (b) unoriginal, and (c) have no reasonable alternatives for use. This is simply a fact, and it’s easy to get testimony from computer scientists to support it. (a) and (b) are supposed to be bars to obtaining a patent at all, and (c) is supposed to be considered too, but the US Patent Office has not been doing its job. If software patents are allowed, the people getting the patents must be forced to *prove* that they are patenting a non-obvious, original process, which they are *not* currently forced to do. And the numerous patents for obvious or unoriginal algorithms previously issued must be cancelled.

The comments on this blog have so far been a great disappointment. Governor Dean was invited to participate here, and agreed to do so. He attempted to address the fact that many of you have specific questions and show that while he does not have the answers now, he will listen to you and gather some facts. IP and Copyright protection is not a central issue to average Americans, nor to any presidential campaign, but he’s offering to listen to you. Instead, with occasional exceptions, you’ve complained like children not getting their way. Some facts for you:

1: Governor Dean is not net-savvy. He has never claimed to be, quite the opposite, in fact. If you believe he is, you’ve not been paying attention. His campaign is well-run and has tech-savvy folks on board. The fact that he is taking the time, and making the effort, to blog here is more remarkable than you seem to understand.
2: Do you honestly think a presidential candidate will take time out to suddenly bone up on IP issues and become an expert? He’s offered to listen to you; give him some information and see what he does with it. Those of you who have done so, good for you and thank you.
3: He really is posting, and does pay attention to these comments (at least some, if not all). I’ve met him, and when I gave my name he immediately recalled my website and what I had written there. He pays attention. Ideas from blogs have a way of appearing in stump speeches and in his e-mails. Having followed him since January, I can tell you you’re seeing his writing style, typos and all. He isn’t going to spend all day reading these frequently useless and redundant posts, but he’ll read them.

Some of you have taken this opportunity for what it is and offered sound questions (i.e. Linux use in the military) or details about IP and copyright issues. That’s great; aside from the rah-rah postings, that’s how things are getting done at Dean’s blog. We don’t always get answers to our questions, but often enough that we know they’re reading and working with us. The comments at the Dean blog may be mostly without sub