[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Microsoft & others oppose interoperability in HR 1555
- To: tap-info@tap.org
- Subject: Microsoft & others oppose interoperability in HR 1555
- From: James Love <love@tap.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 13:37:18 -0400 (EDT)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TAP-INFO - An Internet newsletter available from listproc@tap.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TAXPAYER ASSETS PROJECT - INFORMATION POLICY NOTE
May 22, 1995 - Interoperability Provision in HR 1555
- Microsoft and others seek to eliminate legislative
requirements for interoperability in House
telecommunications bill (HR 1555)
- Issue will be addressed in Wednesday (May 24, 1995) mark-up
by full House Commerce Committee (contact information given
below).
- People are urged to contact House Commerce Committee in
support of Interoperability.
by James Love (202/387-8030; love@tap.org) TAP
There is an important battle in Congress over the issue of
interoperability for the new telecommunications networks. This
battle is currently being waged over sections of HR 1555, the
telecommunications reform bill, that will be marked-up in the
Commerce Committee on Wednesday, May 24, 1995. In Sec. 248(b)
there is language that would require the FCC to establish:
"procedures....for the effective and efficient
interconnection and interoperability of public and
private networks," and for the oversight of
"appropriate industry standards-setting organizations,"
addressing "standards for the interconnection and
interoperability of such networks."
The fight is over the word "interoperability."
Interoperability is an important concept which concerns the
degree to which operating systems for the new telecommunications
networks will be open. Interoperability is considered an
important issue for competition, because if networks are
interoperable, it will be easier for unaffiliated third parties
to write applications which use the full functionality of the
networks.
MICROSOFT LEADS OPPOSITION TO INTEROPERABILITY
Industry groups are split on the issue of the government
requiring interoperability, while most public interest and
consumer groups have supported interoperability. The principal
foe of interoperability is Microsoft. At the subcommittee mark-
up on May 17, Rick White (R-WA, representing Microsoft's
headquarters), offered an amendment to strike most of Sec.
248(b), removing all references to interoperability. White
withdrew the amendment on the 17th, but may offer new language on
the 24th during the full committee mark-up.
The two industry trade groups which oppose the language on
interoperability are the Business Software Alliance (SBA) and the
Alliance to Promote Software Innovation (APSI). Members of these
groups include many of the largest computer software and hardware
companies, including Microsoft, Lotus, Novell, Apple, IBM and
Intel. These firms argued that Interoperability is a term used
to justify taking of their intellectual property. For example,
in May 12, 1995 testimony for SBA and APSI, Don Deutsch from
Sybase, Inc. said:
The term "open" is . . . used in an incorrect way: to
justify compelling companies to share key components of
their software or their hardware technologies with
their competitors for free, or for non-market-place
determined licensing fees. To advance this perverse
sense of "open", some have argued that regulators
should step in to mandate such forced divestiture of
key technologies--the very technologies that
differentiate one product from another--through FCC
mandated regulation. These arguments are often
justified on the basis of the need to achieve
"interoperability." A distinct minority of the software
industry would have this term mean that competitors can
"use" (clone) each others' technology, to make their
specific products (implementations) function and behave
in the same way as products which are successful in the
marketplace. They champion interoperability--and the
corresponding regulated standardization--as a means to
acquire their competitor's technology without incurring
financial or legal liability. For these reasons, we
object generally to using the term interoperability in
the bill.
SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND REPRESENTATIVE ED MARKEY (D-MA)
LEAD FIGHT IN SUPPORT OF INTEROPERABILITY
The main industry trade group supporting strong requirements
for Interoperability is the Computer and Communications Industry
Association (CCIA), which includes many important
telecommunications and computer companies, including: AT&T,
Amdahl, Bell Atlantic, Bell South, MFS Telecom, Northern Telecom,
NYNEX, Oracle, Storage Technology, Sun Microsystems and Tandem.
Sun Microsystems has been particularly active on this issue.
Viacom and America Online have also lobbied in favor of the
interoperability language.
Last year a number of public interest and consumer groups
also supported Interoperability in the legislation, including the
Consumer Federation of America, the Media Access Project, People
for the American Way, and the Taxpayer Assets Project. (The bill
has been moving so fast in the House we don't know which public
interest groups have been lobbying on this provision this year.)
Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), who chaired the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and Finance last year, is the main proponent
of Interoperability on the Committee.
In May 12, 1995 testimony on behalf of CCIA in support of
Interoperability requirements, Tom Gooch of Storage Technology
Corporation said:
In terms of information -- interoperability is the
transparent access to digital data between elements of
an information network. These elements are supplied by
a wide range of manufactures, they include computers,
telephony devices, and their interconnecting
infrastructures. . . [I]nformation is most valuable
when it can be sent and received without the
requirement that the sender and the receiver have
identical equipment. To accomplish true information
interoperability, all sources of information need to
support open, non-proprietary interfaces. . .
In this open environment, products must compete based
on their perceived value to the consumer and not on
their access capability to the infrastructure. . .
The government should promote unobstructed entry by
ensuring that interfaces that are critical to the
interoperability of the network, be made freely
available. The exception, being if a patent already
exists on a critical interface, then the interface
information made need to be licensed. However, it is
paramount that technical information relating to these
interfaces be available on reasonable terms and
conditions demonstrable free of discrimination. . . We
are seeking government action to promote
interoperability and consumer choice.
TAP VIEW
TAP believes that it is extremely important that the
operating systems for the new telecommunications networks be as
open as possible, and TAP strongly supports requirements that
telecommunications carriers provide for interoperability. We are
already receiving reports that some of the new networks are using
proprietary interfaces to limit competition. If the operating
systems for the new networks are closed and proprietary there
will be less competition and more monopoly power in content
markets.
CONTACTS FOR MORE INFORMATION
WORKING TO ELIMINATE INTEROPERABILITY FROM BILL
Business Software Alliance (Becca Gould) 202/872-5500
Alliance to Promote Software Innovation (Emory Simon) 202/293-
2700
Rep. Rick White (John Kelley)
SUPPORTING ORIGINAL INTEROPERABILITY LANGUAGE
Computer and Communications Industry Assocation (Gregory Gorman)
202/783-0070
Sun Microsystems (Christine Owens) 202/326-7521
Rep. Ed Markey (David Moulton)
DEFINITION OF INTEROPERABILITY
The definition of Interoperability isn't found in many
dictionaries. The Computer Systems Policy Project (CSPP)
definition is one that is widely used. It follows:
INTEROPERABILITY: The ability of two or more systems
to interact in concert with one another in accordance
with a prescribed method in order achieve a predictable
result. Interoperability allows diverse systems made
by different vendors to communicate with each other.
Interoperability implies compatibility among systems at
specified levels of interaction. This compatibility is
achieved through specifications for the Interfaces
between systems.
CURRENT LANGUAGE AND WHITE (MICROSOFT) AMENDMENT COMPARED
1. Here is the current language for Sec. 248(b):
`(b) Coordination for Interoperability and Accessibility .
- The Commission shall establish -
`(1) procedures for the conduct of coordinated network
planning by common carriers and other providers of
telecommunications services or information services, subject to
Commission supervision, for the effective and efficient
interconnection and interoperability of public and private
networks; and
`(2) procedures for Commission oversight of the development
by appropriate industry standards-setting organizations of -
`(A) standards for the interconnection and
interoperability of such networks;
`(B) standards that promote access to network
capabilities and services by individuals with disabilities;
and
`(C) standards that promote access to information
services by subscribers to telephone exchange
service furnished by a rural telephone company.
2. Here is the revised (and much changed) language for Sec
248(b) that Rick White (R-WA) offered at the Subcomittee
mark-up on the 17th:
strike Sec. 248(b) and replace with:
`(b) Coordination for Interconnectivity. - The Commission
may participate, in a manner consistent with its authority and
practice prior to the date of enactment of this section, in the
development by appropriate industry standards-setting
organizations of--
`(1) standards that promote access to network capabilities
and services by individuals with disabilities; and
`(2) standards that promote access to information
services by subscribers to telephone exchange service
furnished by a rural telephone company.
Here is the contact information for the House Commerce
Committee:
Committee on Commerce
PHONE FAX
REPUBLICANS
Bliley, Thomas,Chmn (VA) 225-2927 225-0011
Moorhead,Carlos(CA) 225-4176 226-1279
Fields, Jack 226-2424 226-4105
Oxley, Michael(OH)v-c 225-2676 226-1160
Bilirakis, Michael(FL) 225-5755 225-4085
Schaefer,Dan(CO) 225-7882 225-7885
schaefer@hr.house.gov
Barton,Joe(TX) 225-2002 225-3052
Hastert,Dennis(IL) 225-2976 225-0697
dhastert@hr.house.gov
Stearns,Cliff (FL) 225-5744 225-3973
cstearns@hr.house.gov
Paxon,Bill(NY) 225-5260 225-5910
Gillmor,Paul(OH) 225-6405 225-1985
Klug,Scott(WI) 225-2906 225-6942
Franks, Gary (CT) 225-3822 225-5085
Greenwood, Jim (PA) 225-4276 225-9511
Crapo, Michael (ID) 225-5531 225-8216
Cox,Christopher(CA) 225-5611 225-9177
Burr, Richard (NC) 225-2071 225-2995
Bilbray, Brian (CA) 225-2040 225-2948
Whitefield, Ed (KY) 225-3115 225-3547
Ganske, Greg (IA) 225-4426 225-3193
Frisa,Dan(NY) 225-5516 225-3187
Norwood, Charlie (GA) 225-4101 225-3397
White,Rick(WA) 225-6311 225-3524
repwhite@hr.house.gov
Coburn,Tom(OK) 225-2701 225-3038
DEMOCRATS
Dingell, John(MI) 225-4071
Waxman, Henry(CA) 225-3976 225-4099
Markey, Edward(MA) 225-2836 225-1716
Tauzin,W.J.(Billy)(LA) 225-4031 225-0563
Wyden, Ron(OR) 225-4811 225-8941
Hall, Ralph(TX) 225-6673 225-3332
Bryant, John(TX) 225-2231 225-0327
Boucher, Rick(VA) 225-3861 225-0442
ninthnet@hr.house.gov
Manton, Tom(NY) 225-3965 225-1909
tmanton@hr.house.gov
Towns, Edolphus(NY) 225-5061 225-1018
Studds, Gerry(MA) 225-3111 225-2212
Pallone, Frank(NJ) 225-4671 225-9665
Brown, Sherrod(OH) 225-3401 225-2266
Lambert Lincoln,Blanche(AR) 225-4076 225-4654
Gordon, Bart(TN) 225-4231 225-6887
Furse, Elizabeth(OR) 225-0855 225-9497
Deutsch, Peter(FL) 225-7931 225-8456
Rush, Bobby(IL) 225-4372 226-0333
Eshoo, Anna(GA) 225-8104 225-8890
annagram@hr.house.gov
Klink, Ron(PA) 225-2565 226-2274
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TAP-INFO is an Internet Distribution List provided by the Taxpayer
Assets Project (TAP). TAP was founded by Ralph Nader to monitor the
management of government property, including information systems and
data, government funded R&D, spectrum allocation and other government
assets. TAP-INFO reports on TAP activities relating to federal
information policy. Tap-info is archived at www.essential.org or
gopher.essential.org, in the Taxpayer Assets Project Directory.
Subscription requests to tap-info to listproc@tap.org with
the message: subscribe tap-info your name
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Taxpayer Assets Project; P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
v. 202/387-8030; f. 202/234-5176; internet: tap@tap.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------